You’re arguing in March of 2023 that the issue is a lack of jobs?

I'd summarize their comment as "the issue is a lack of skilled jobs."

The ratio of skilled : unskilled jobs. As well as the general decline in what constitutes a skilled job.

People with these IQs under 85 are generally not employable in some of the lowest end jobs available: warehouseman, packer, or package delivery. I'm not sure what jobs you're imagining that are simpler than those, but I think I'm going to agree with the data on this point.

You think 15% of the population is too dumb to deliver packages? More than 1 in 10 people is not smart enough to pack things?

I think the framing here has to be very careful: I agree with the general psychometric data that ~15% of struggle to get or keep a job delivering packages or packing things. This is not the same as packing something or delivering a package. Jobs require a certain speed of execution, ability to adapt to changing conditions, low rate of mistake, and a maximum training time.

Remember, even the army during war time, which requires people fulfilling botho f these services won't hire people with such a low IQ.

Alright this one annoyed me enough to look it up.

First of all Peterson’s claim is 83, not 85.

Second, The military does not test IQ. It has a different test with a decent correlation. This test scores in percentiles however. And the bottom 10% are not allowed in. This is not the same thing as 10% of all people cannot get in, as those taking the military test are probably a lower IQ subset on average.

Probably not by much. I would guess the military is current cutting off the bottom 8-10% of the population.

I can’t find much in the way of hard stats but I still feel pretty strongly that a 10th percentile individual is more than well equipped to be a delivery driver of a warehouse worker or whatever.