Should low IQ humans be sterilized to stop dysgenics?

People below 110 IQ don't deserve to leave offsprings.

It should be inversely related to the time you spend on Facebook


More time= free one way train ticket

It shouldn't stop at IQ though. Some autistic people have high IQ.

I've taken tests where I get 103 then other standard tests in college that put me in 129.
I don't give a shit anymore.

>tfw to intelligent

why even ask when the answer is so obvious

yeah dont be so quick to put yourself on a pedestle buddy.

Your IQ is only a measure of your capacity for intelligence, not your actual intelligence. You can have an IQ of 120 and still be dumber than someone with an IQ of 100.

We're already not having enough kids, OP

I am not intelligent and women know it, after first talk they usually have something else to do and never call back / are always busy. It is natural selection and it is already undergoing.

It would kill all women.

110?? id make it 90, youd literally genocide everyone otherwise

GOOD THING I WATCHED RICK AND MORTY AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

I actually think 85 is average for anyone south of the border in the US. This might be better.

Lots of high I.Q. kids born to low I.Q. parents and vice versa.

Top kek

>I got an idea instead of trying to introduce gene editing on the next generation and solve the low IQ crisis well spend billions of dollars rounding up 60% of the population, many of whom would be white, and forcefully sterilize them.
Kill you are self

Why not just make society reward what you want out of people, then evolution will just take care of the problem for you.

If being smarter was really so important for survival then more people would be smart.

Yes, exterminate the weak and improve the species. No welfare for anyone below 130 IQ.

All people should be capped at two children person. To have more than two children, people should have to pay a substantial fee. Only rich (on average more intelligent) people can afford such a feed. One-Child Policy was stupid and had bad unintended consequences with gender imbalances, but for some reason China get ZERO credit for it's new forward-thinking and eugenic 2-child policy. Worse, it's demonized for it. Sure, it's not overly eugenic, and it doesn't go far enough, but it does cap the growth of the lower end up the bell curve when tends to average FAR more than two children if left uncontrolled. The Chinese model is much more eugenic than the western model, and it's going to pay off for them in the long run.

I actually think a state or federal fine would stop this problem. And No welfare for a a mother if she's on her second child out of wedlock. This would encourage abortion and even just taking birth control.

Only land owners should get together vote

I don't know, I'm not sure most women care that much unless you're a full fledged autistic retard. I'm not trying to take a jab at you, but it could be that you're just not very attractive, I say this as a very average looking male myself.

you need low iq people to do the low iq jobs you fucking idiot

Agreed. But for the sake of avoiding issues, keep the bar at 100 points until the automation age kicks in.

Strongly agree. This should be enforced worldwide.

Blacks will bitch but we will all be better for it in the end, especially them.

Selective breeding is required to improve humanity.

I'll take anything that has a realistic chance of passing in a western country. Personally, I can't think of anything. With respect to hard caps on children, another benefit of the two-child policy is that lower IQ people have higher mortality rates than higher IQ people, which means if low IQ and high IQ are capped at the same exact number of children (not even factoring in a fee system to increase high IQ fertility), in the longer run, the low IQ population will decrease relative to the high IQ simply as a function of *slightly* lower average fertility due to depressed lifespans. You can do all of this without hurting anyone, who playing messy games with taxes, and welfare. Welfare doesn't matter for eugenics purposes if birth are capped in the first place.

Try paying them for it instead of making it mandatory. And don't set the threshold at 110, that's much too high. Civilization needs more if its people than that, especially given that IQ-biased depopulation still risks slashing the population of the smartest even if it raises their proportion.

>tfw ethnically Ethiopian and tested 128 w/ psychologist
>tfw smarter than the average white
>tfw smarter than most poltards who see me as subhuman
>tfw still not genius-tier