If adjusted for IQ, do all races earn the same in the US?

Question

In book The Global Bell Curve by Richard Lynn, there is the following table:

Herrnstein and Murray addressed the problem of how far the lower socioeconomic status and earnings of blacks and Hispanics can be explained by their lower IQs. These analyses were confined to men and were conducted for socioeconomic status by matching whites, blacks, and Hispanics for IQ. First, they took all those with an IQ of 117 (the average IQ of those in SES 1), and looked at the percentages of those with IQs of 117 who were in SES 1. They found that blacks with an IQ of 117 were much more likely than whites to be in SES 1 (26 percent as compared with 10 percent), and Hispanics with an IQ of 117 were also more likely than whites to be in SES 1 ( 16 percent as compared with 10 percent) (p. 321). The apparent advantage of blacks and Hispanics for socioeconomic status did not, however, hold for earnings. For these Herrnstein and Murray (p. 321) matched whites, blacks, and Hispanics for IQ by taking all those with an IQ of 100 and examined their earnings. They found that whites earned slightly more than Hispanics, while Hispanics earned slightly more than blacks. The differences however were very small in so far as all three racial groups with IQs of 100 earned between $25,000 and $25,600 a year. These results are shown in Table 1.2.

It claims that in the US, those with an IQ of 117 all earn roughly the same amount of money on average, regardless of their race. Is this true?

Note: The actual claim in the book may not be notable. But claims that

1. Certain groups are smarter
2. The smarter groups make more money

are very common among anyone not progressive. I just want the truth

Samples https://www.reddit.com/r/aznidentity/comments/nnzt47/percent_of_students_in_2020_with_a_total_sat/

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/race-gaps-in-sat-scores-highlight-inequality-and-hinder-upward-mobility/

Answer 1

Given the downvotes and discussion I want to start by making clear that the quote and screenshot from Lynn's book claim to be simply reporting the findings by Hernstein and Murray from their much more notable and controversial 1994 book, The Bell Curve. For a general overview of the many reasons this book is consider to be deeply flawed by most experts, the Wikipedia article is a good place to start. Without diving in to this controversy on which many books have been written, I'll just mention two key points. a) Their book was not subjected to peer review. b) No standard IQ test is universally accepted as a meaningful measure of general intelligence, if such a thing exists.

That said, Lynn's table 1.2 accurately summarizes data included in two of Hernstein and Murray's tables (pp. 322-323). Do these data points mean what they say it means, and can their findings be replicated?

I was only able to find one study (Cawley et al. 1997) that directly and explicitly looks at this question, and its findings were quite different. Using a more robust measure of intelligence and doing systematic regression analysis of how it interacts with career choice, earnings and race, they conclude that "the returns to 'g' [IQ] differ significantly across race and gender; payment is not made for 'ability' alone."

So while the data points in the question are probably factually reported, they should not be considered reliable evidence of the claim they are alleged to support.