Comments on: The Relationship Between Tattoos And Income

By: Weekly Round-Up: Visiting Mom and Family

Weekly Round-Up: Visiting Mom and Family — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 15:53:03 +0000

[...] The Relationship Between Tatoos and Income [...]

By: Ron

Ron — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 15:35:25 +0000

Maybe tattoos in general is too broad but I’d be willing to bet there’s STRONG correlation between income and *facial* tattoos. After all, if all those guys on Wall Street have one on their shoulders, who would know?

By: The Dough Roller Weekly Roundup (Tradeking Promo Edition) | Credit Guy

The Dough Roller Weekly Roundup (Tradeking Promo Edition) | Credit Guy — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:21:40 +0000

[...] The Relationship Between Tatoos and Income @ Weakonomics: It’s not exactly a “Whats the meaning of Life” type question but it going to win a Pulitzer one day. [...]

By: Josh

Josh — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 02:27:47 +0000

Weakonomist, that sounds like something right out of the book ‘Freakonomics’ which you recommended

By: Credit Card Chaser

Credit Card Chaser — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 02:18:08 +0000

Interesting article – nice to see that you didn’t fall into the trap of equating correlation with causation as many people tend to do.
Credit Card Chaser´s last blog ..Wells Fargo Credit Cards to be Marketed to Wachovia Customers

By: jayme

jayme — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 00:43:17 +0000

I think there is a negative correlation, but probably not for the reasons many would. I am in the research biology field, i like to think of it as the rogues of the biology world that didnt want medical school but still wanted to help. While not all biologists are tattooed, many of them are, and some of them extensivley including myself. and as many of you may or may not know, many research biologists are professors at universities, which does not pay exceptionally well.

So while if you have a tattoo on your face you proboably are headed for disaster, just cause you have a tattoo on any other part of you, visible or not does not make you any less intellegent or contientous. it just means you like to express yourself through art you can bring with you everywhere.

By: the weakonomist

the weakonomist — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:20:17 +0000

Donnie, that would be an amazing test to do.

Rob, correlations do result in more research, in the case of tattoos though it would only contribute to
the stereotype.

By: Craig

Craig — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 16:08:20 +0000

Interesting, but would be hard to pick a select sample group. To be honest my stereotypes probably would be the same as you.

By: Donnie

Donnie — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:48:51 +0000

The real test would be to measure an un-tattooed population’s income. Have a random half of them get a tattoo (somewhere prominent), and compare their earnings to the un-tattooed half of the population 10 years later.

I’m going to guess that the tattooed half will make less.

By: Rob Bennett

Rob Bennett — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:22:55 +0000

There is nothing gained from knowing if a correlation exists. In fact you probably lose a bit of open mindedness about tattooed people you meet for the first time.

I think you go too far with this, Phil.

I like the point you are making. There is a risk that knowing about the correlation will cause you to jump to conclusions. That really can be a big negative because it causes you to believe things that just ain’t so.

But knowing about a correlation can also cause you to engage in deeper explorations. That’s how we learn.

I say that learning about a correlation can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on what you do in response to learning about it. Jumping to conclusions is bad. Exploring possible explanations is good.

Rob
Rob Bennett´s last blog ..Podcast #161 — The Time-Price Connection