Imagine it like this, if we give someone a history test, a math test, a physics test, and english test. We'll notice how good you are at any given tests predicts how good you are at other tests. Even though math and history don't have any real overlap in terms of skills. They also found that doing well on some of these tests will better predict how well you'll do at others. For instance math and physics are typically more g-loaded so if someone does well on a math or physics test they are more likely to do well on an english test than the reverse. We call this quality of that predicts how well you're going to do at intellectual tasks g. And then we built a test to try to measure G and that's an IQ test, with IQ being the measurement of g.
People say stuff like this all the time as if it's an uncontroversial fact, and it's much less supported by the literature than you're implying. So much of this is a matter of interpretation and the people interpreting it are generally people personally vested in the concept of IQ
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4557354/
I do agree that an IQ test can help measure severe intellectual impairment, or a change in an individual's ability because of illness or injury. I have a lot of doubts about it's meaningfulness beyond that.
Almost all of which can also be predicted pretty well using your zip code. Are you sure IQ is measuring something internal?