Freakonomics

[dragansfanone]

Has anyone read Freakonomics? Recommend?

 

[sweetpeas]

my friend recommended this for me so i've yet to start.. i've only heard good things about this book so give it a try.

 

[Miss Shelf]

come on, hasn't anyone read this?? I've been waiting to find out if it's worth reading!

 

[SFG75]

Is this one along the lines of Confessions of an Economic hit man or is it just about weird and odd statistics that occur in every day life?

 

[curiouswonder]

come on, hasn't anyone read this?? I've been waiting to find out if it's worth reading!

I read it a couple of weeks ago. His findings are pretty interesting and what he does with stats is far different than the kinds of things you usually hear in the media. His approach of asking questions and then trying to figure out how he will get the answers is different than a lot of research /polling that has the answer in mind before anyone asks the question. A lot of his findings / topics are a few years old, but still worth checking out. I would recommend it.

 

[Sanitha]

Worth Reading?

How good is this book? Is it worth reading even if you aren't completely fascinated by the world of numbers? I was quite impressed with it having won a Quill Book Award.

 

[veggiedog]

How good is this book? Is it worth reading even if you aren't completely fascinated by the world of numbers?

I loved Freakonomics, and it has very little to do with numbers (well, actually there are a lot of numbers involved, but they only enhance the reading experience, to put it cheesily). There's a lot of stuff revealed in the book that people haven't always through about or questioned before, but the book is clearly an attack on conventional wisdom. Levitt has a very interesting approach when it comes to unveiling truths and solving problems. The way he interprets the data leads to findings rarely or never thought about before. Some of the answers reveal more questions.

All in all, it's a very interesting book. I possess no love of numbers or mathematics (try something closer to hatred) but I was able to appreciate the point the authors were trying to make. I would suggest checking it our of a library first, before buying it. I don't think it's the sort of book that would appeal to EVERYONE because it rather forthright in its findings (i.e. some people may take offense at some of the interpretations of the statistics).

 

[Prairie_Girl]

I keep almost buying this, but I need to do it quick, while it's still a best seller. Right now it's 30% off at Chapters, plus I get another ten. I won't be able to buy it that cheap as a trade paper. I think I'll pick it up tomorrow.

 

[Motokid]

I read it over the weekend. If you can find it at the library you'll be happy no matter what. Hardcover cost was about $25.00. Too much for me. Library free....just perfect.

The book reads quick and easy. Not bogged down with numbers and charts and math stuff. It's interesting discussion.

What's more dangerous a gun or a swimming pool?
Can a name effect your future? "White name" or "black name"?
Has legalized abortion had a direct effect on violent crime in America?
Does reading books to your child make your child smarter?
Does spanking make you child smarter?
Do inner-city gangs operate like big business?
Do teachers cheat on the tests they give their students and why might they?

 

[novella]

I read a lot of economics analysis, mostly on The Levy Institute website. I think all economics analysis is interesting and open to neverending debate.

A few of the issues I have with Freakonomics:

As Malcolm Gladwell has pointed out, if crime rates have gone down due to legalized abortion, why wasn't there a corresponding drop in crime when the Pill (the use of which is far more widespread) was legalized? Instead, in the generation following that legalization, crime dramatically increased.

Also, Freakonomics points only to crime rates in INNER CITIES. In the same period, suburban and rural crime rose substantially. I think there has been a displacement of the poor from inner cities to poorer suburbs, beginning in the late 80s.

Things like comparing the structure of big businesses with the structure of criminal gangs are invidious, unless you also compare them with other societal structure, such as governments and families and family businesses, which also have many similarities.

The point is, economists can look at any phenomenon and find a few threads of influence feeding into it, and make a story about it. That's what they do. So much of it is thought-provoking.

I think the strength of that book is in the authors' knack for finding phenomena that the average person will sit up and pay attention to. I mean, how many people are interested in the rate of increase of personal debt in China, even though the implications for the world are far more serious?

 

[Motokid]

There is a section in the book about fear. How to put a sleeping baby to bed. Face down or face up? Cars being safer than airplanes or not? Guns or swimming pools, which is safer?

The only thing I can say is that had I paid the Borders asking price of $25.00 for the book I'd be way ticked off, but since I got it at the library I was quite happy with it.

I'd suggest it to anybody who, like me, loves to question everything.

You can read it in a weekend, and more than likely in a day. It's only about 200 pages long.

Get it from the library though. Or second hand.

 

[pontalba]

I keep almost buying this, but I need to do it quick, while it's still a best seller. Right now it's 30% off at Chapters, plus I get another ten. I won't be able to buy it that cheap as a trade paper. I think I'll pick it up tomorrow.

If you haven't already purchased it, try Zooba....9.95 U.S. dollars.

haven't read it as of yet, its in the stack.

 

[novella]

There is a section in the book about fear. How to put a sleeping baby to bed. Face down or face up? Cars being safer than airplanes or not? Guns or swimming pools, which is safer?

.

These are exactly the kinds of questions that demand closer analysis, not just pat answers.

If everyone flew a plane to work, I think airplanes would be more dangerous than cars.

If kids were told to go outside and play with the gun, guns would be more dangerous than swimming pools.

Right? I mean, it's obvious that these comparisons are apples and oranges. Why compare two entirely different things? A weapon and a hole in the ground full of water? An airplane that takes months, if not years, of training and currency and constant 'checking out' to fly (my hub's a private pilot, BTW), or a vehicle any 17 year old can hop into in the middle of the night?

 

[ions]

I read a lot of economics analysis, mostly on The Levy Institute website. I think all economics analysis is interesting and open to neverending debate.

A few of the issues I have with Freakonomics:

As Malcolm Gladwell has pointed out, if crime rates have gone down due to legalized abortion, why wasn't there a corresponding drop in crime when the Pill (the use of which is far more widespread) was legalized? Instead, in the generation following that legalization, crime dramatically increased.

I don't think this was mentioned in Freakonomics but one possible explanation is that those methods were simply too exensive for the parent that would end up having a child with a high probability of becoming a criminal.

Also, Freakonomics points only to crime rates in INNER CITIES. In the same period, suburban and rural crime rose substantially. I think there has been a displacement of the poor from inner cities to poorer suburbs, beginning in the late 80s.

Suburban and rural crime rose substantially because drugs are first available in the 'inner city' and spread outward. Thus the delayed increase in crime rates outside of city cores.

The point is, economists can look at any phenomenon and find a few threads of influence feeding into it, and make a story about it. That's what they do. So much of it is thought-provoking.

I think the strength of that book is in the authors' knack for finding phenomena that the average person will sit up and pay attention to. I mean, how many people are interested in the rate of increase of personal debt in China, even though the implications for the world are far more serious?

Agreed. It is certainly sensationalized, definately pop-economics.

If everyone flew a plane to work, I think airplanes would be more dangerous than cars.

If kids were told to go outside and play with the gun, guns would be more dangerous than swimming pools.

Right? I mean, it's obvious that these comparisons are apples and oranges. Why compare two entirely different things? A weapon and a hole in the ground full of water? An airplane that takes months, if not years, of training and currency and constant 'checking out' to fly (my hub's a private pilot, BTW), or a vehicle any 17 year old can hop into in the middle of the night?

Well, the planes and cars comparison is made in the book because it's made all the time by travellers. Any pilot can still be inept, drunk, whatever. Thisis completely fair. and I think their point on the comparison:

The per-hour death rate of driving versus flying, however, is about equal. The two contraptions are equally likely (or, in truth, unlikely) to lead to death.

The guns versus pools comparison was made to illustrate the poor logic almost all parents put into rearing their children. Statistics cleary show one thing but parents parade on doing their thing.

After all that I think this book is rather mediocre. A few interesting concepts but that was the books problem. There were only a few concepts. Inspired by a NYT article it ended up becoming a heavily padded article. Too much time was spent on simple concepts that had already been proven earlier in the book when new ideas could have been introduced. I'm very glad I got my copy free as I would have disappointed paying much for this quick thin read. 3/5

 

[Wilco]

I read this book a year ago, when it was a small trend to read it (it was amongst some of those I know, anyway). Full of anticipation I started reading. Although the first chapters were interesting, the concept gets quite boring and repetitive after a while. It seemed to me that all the chapters revealed the same arguments, just through different means. Unfortunately it's been too long to go in the arguments here described in more detail, but overall I recall that I was glad to have finished it...