Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores a Hidden Side of Everything (P.S.)
ISBN13: 9780060731335Condition: NewNotes: BUY WITH CONFIDENCE, Over one million books sold! 98% Positive feedback. Compare our books, prices and ser...
- ISBN13: 9780060731335
- Condition: New
- Notes: BUY WITH CONFIDENCE, Over a single million books sold! 98% Positive feedback. Compare a books, prices as well as use to a competition. 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed
Which is some-more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? What do schoolteachers as well as sumo wrestlers have in common? How most do relatives unequivocally matter? These might not receptive to advice similar to standard questions for an economist to ask. But Steven D. Levitt is not a standard economist. He studies a riddles of bland life—from intrigue as well as crime to parenting as well as sports—and reaches conclusions which spin required knowledge upon a head. Freakonomics is a groundbreaking partnership in between Levitt as well as Steph
Rating: 
(out of 1782 reviews)
List Price: $ 15.99
Price: $ 8.49
BUY: Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores a Hidden Side of Everything (P.S.)
Review by Bearette24 for Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything (P.S.)
Rating:
Steven Levitt, an economist during U Chicago, is reduction meddlesome in numbers as good as some-more meddlesome in because people spin out the approach they do. He examines the change of incentive, heredity, the area we grew up in, etc.
Some of his conclusions have been reduction than earth-shattering. For example, African-American names (DeShawn, Latanya) do not change African-American exam performance. As the second example, Levitt gathered interpretation per online dating websites as good as resolved which bald organisation as good as overweight women fared badly. Not space station science.
However, Levitt livens up the book with the little argumentative discussions. He believes which the thespian dump in crime in the 1990s can be traced to Roe v. Wade. He thinks which the young kids who would have committed crimes (due to being brought up by impoverished, teenage, singular mothers) have been simply not being innate as often.
He additionally writes about the male who some-more or reduction singlehandedly contributed to the KKK’s passing by infiltrating their organisation as good as leaking their tip passwords as good as rituals to the people at the back of the Superman comic book (Superman indispensable the latest enemy).
Interestingly, he additionally discusses how rude relatives do not minister to the child’s success. For example, carrying the lot of books in the residence has the certain change upon children’s exam scores, though celebration of the mass to the kid the lot has no effect. Highly prepared relatives have been additionally the plus, whilst tying children’s radio time is irrelevant. Similarly, domestic possibilities who have the lot of income to financial their campaigns have been still out of fitness if no the single likes them.
In the section entitled “Why Drug Dealers Live With Their Mothers,” Levitt explores the economics of drug dealing. An Indian, Harvard-affiliated academician motionless to get up tighten as good as personal with moment gangs as good as got the little notebooks documenting their finances. Levitt concludes which drug dealers’ empires have been the lot similar to McDonald’s or the edition attention in Manhattan – usually the people upon the really tip of the pyramid do good financially, whilst the burger flippers, paper assistants, as good as low-level drug runners do not (indeed, the little of them work for free, or in lapse for protection!)
Overall, this is the sharp-witted read, with the little viewable conclusions as good as the little not so obvious.
Review by M. JEFFREY MCMAHON for Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything (P.S.)
Rating:
This book succeeds during analyzing sociological developments in the approach which is interesting since Steven Levitt, an economist who strays from convention, has the knack for unpeeling layers as well as layers of assumptions as well as parable as well as display the genuine causes during the back of trends. He shows, to name the little examples, how the names start the career paths; how termination as well as the crime rate have been related; how the male used his deceit to disparage the Klu Klux Klan rsther than than rest upon required methods; how easy it is to brand the purpose of open propagandize teachers when they assistance their students lie upon standardised tests; because drug traffic is usually remunerative for the dealers during the tip of the pyramid; the parable which genuine estate agents have been seeking for the most appropriate interests.
The book, co-authored by Stephen J. Dubner, is spacious as well as anecdotal, which is an in effect format for presenting the lot of sociological trends but being dry or losing the scintillating reportage in unenlightened prose.
The doctrine of this book is which we should be leery of guileless society’s usual assumptions or usual wisdom. In alternative words, the book encourages us to keep the thoughts rapt as well as mangle out of the distinctive nature in the approach we see things. By seeking during amicable trends with the uninformed eye, the book succeeds during creation mercantile trends the fun, brave endeavor.
If we were to impugn the book, it would be which it is as well short. It’s hardly 200 pages as well as if we take out the vacant section pages, the charts, the lists, as well as so on, it’s unequivocally closer to 150 pages. Because the element is so stream as well as topical, the process of “freakonomics” presented here would have the great format for the monthly magazine. My theory is which there will be most sequels.
Review by Ed Uyeshima for Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores a Hidden Side of Everything (P.S.)
Rating:
Having myself survived a economics module during a University of Chicago as a immature connoisseur tyro twenty years ago, we know how decidedly individualist their laurelled scholars can be. One of a many prestigious of a stream stand there, Steven D. Levitt, along with publisher Stephen J. Dubner, has created a many appealing as well as mind-bending book which uses Chicago-style econometric approaches as well as relates those to amicable as well as domestic issues which differently crop up paltry as well as have no strong basement in awake speculation which would await a function underneath study. In fact, this book of constrained box studies bears similarities to a proceed taken by writer Malcolm Gladwell in his new best-selling book, “The Tipping Point”, where he takes essentially chronological events as well as analyzes them roughly anecdotally as exercises in tellurian behavior, in his case, creation connectors as well as how ideas turn trends not by light slur though by a unaccompanied thespian moment.
But Levitt’s board is broader, his theories as well as commentary have been distant some-more diverse, as well as his proceed is distant some-more quantitative in nature. For example, he hurdles a notice which debate spending determines elections. Levitt’s investigate takes a uninformed demeanour by resisting races in which a same dual congressional possibilities run regularly opposite any other. What he concludes is which a winning claimant can outlay half as many as prior to as well as remove usually a single percent of a vote, whilst a losing claimant who doubles debate spending picks up usually a single percent more. Basically they infer which no make a difference how many possibilities outlay upon their campaigns, a formula would not be marginally affected. In an additional example, a authors report a seller’s genuine estate agent, who lives upon elect as well as has an inducement to sell a listed home for limit dollar. Again, this is a myth given a authors say a tiny monetary prerogative to an representative who sells a home for a couple of thousand some-more dollars is lilliputian by a larger income to be done by offered properties for reduction though quicker. Levitt’s investigate in to a sale of a single hundred thousand Chicago homes found which agents keep their own homes upon a marketplace an normal of 10 days longer as well as sell them for some-more than 3 percent some-more than a homes they list as well as sell for clients.
The perspicacious analyses supposing by Levitt crop up to have no end as he identifies Chicago teachers, who were proven to be becoming different their students’ exam answers as well as in end dismissed for their actions; sumo wrestlers who were found to be intrigue as well; as well as even a pick as well as some-more remunerative career options which moment dealers might have during McDonald’s contra creation sales. He even questions a stroke of a great initial name in a person’s after hold up as well as if young kids turn some-more lettered if their relatives review to them. The conclusions astounded me as they will you. But a many constrained investigate he presents is associated to a stroke of Roe vs. Wade. In a investigate he conducted with Stanford law Professor John Donohue, Levitt creates a clearly broad-stroked end in attributing many of a dump in a U.S. crime rate to ratified abortion. Their evidence was formed upon a speculation which termination prevented a births of neglected young kids who differently would have been statistically some-more expected to grown up in to criminals. The crime rate dump coincided with a time those aborted pregnancies would differently have strike their teenager years, as well as a direction showed up progressing in states such as California which were a initial to order some-more magnanimous entrance to abortions. Through a interpretation they gather, a association is startling, as well as a end is tough to rebut notwithstanding a naysayers who felt a bleak to be politically motivated. But to Levitt’s academically prone credit, he never seems similar to he has an ideological bulletin as he lets a numbers do a articulate for him. His might is to take those clearly incomprehensible sets of numbers, seek out out a revealing settlement as well as commend what it all means. A shining thoughts is during work, as he takes a many paltry open-ended questions as well as essentially answers them. Strongly recommended.
Review by Jason Kelly for Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores a Hidden Side of Everything (P.S.)
Rating:
I approaching most some-more from this book, together with a little tangible mercantile speculation as good as contention of what separates judicious investigate from credentials noise. The usually thought-provoking square in this multi-coloured pick up of interesting (to some) factoids is a a single about termination being a means of disappearing crime. Beyond that, all a book touches is possibly paltry or rehashed from somewhere else, essentially a New York Times essay by co-author Dubner.
A categorical grounds in a book is which asking a right questions in hold up is important. It afterwards deduction to ask roughly nothing of them. For instance, what do sumo wrestlers as good as teachers have in common? you theory a title itself is great for a snicker, though afterwards you pretence which it will pierce upon to find a little once dark tie of worth to us. Don’t get your hopes up. Instead, after pages of nonessential credentials upon tutorial cunning testing, it is suggested which – no! – teachers have deceived to progress their students’ scores. What’s more, shhh, spasmodic sumo wrestlers have deceived to urge a friend’s ranking by vouchsafing him win. Again, shocking? Not during all. Both of these revelations have been explored prior to as good as intrigue doesn’t display any commonality in between teachers as good as sumo wrestlers which doesn’t branch from both groups being merely human. People cheat. Teachers as good as sumo wresters have been people. Therefore, they both lie as good as that’s what they have in common. Some groundbreaking research, eh? The authors could only as simply have selected any capricious organisation of people, found a tellurian trait, as good as afterwards shown how both groups vaunt it. For instance, what do powerful sellers as good as plumbers have in common? Both take worth of obligatory situations to assign aloft prices. What do Balinese dancers as good as corporate lawyers have in common? Both eat not as big lunches during bustling seasons.
This book’s underline is, “A Rogue Economist Explores a Hidden Side of Everything”. A some-more suitable a single would have been, “An Ordinary Economist Ponders Too Long About a Widely Known Side of a Few Unimportant Subjects”. Randomly put together, you competence add, as good as that’s an additional irritating point. The book has roughly no classification whatsoever. Rather than receiving a time to classify a book in to a judicious manner, a authors fun about it being a random pick up of points as good as explain which as explanation of their brute status. If that’s rogue, I’ll take required any day.
It’s transparent which these authors have been smart group who substantially have something inestimable to write. Unfortunately, they didn’t write it in this book. The “Freak” in Freakonomics is ostensible to impute to offbeat research or an bizarre perspective. Instead it refers to a bizarre actuality that, so mostly in publishing, what’s of durability worth goes out of imitation as good as what’s fleetingly interesting climbs a charts.
You would do good to jump over this one.
Review by Lawrence Kwong for Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores a Hidden Side of Everything (P.S.)
Rating:
The systematic fealty of amicable scholarship is a theme of exhilarated row in academics. Steven Levitt as great as Stephen Dubner have successfully brought this discuss to a mainstream in a form of their corner book, Freakonomics. But do they have a clever box for validating statistical analyses of an forever formidable tellurian society?
As any statistician will discuss it you, a singular of a vital pitfalls of their margin is a worry of association as great as causation. Just since X as great as Y have identical trends does not indispensably meant which X caused Y or which Y caused X. Numerous times via a book, Levitt as great as Dubner disapprove assorted experts, pundits, as great as required wisdoms for unwell to comply this simple tenet. Yet so tantalizing is this trap which a authors tumble right in along with their targets.
Take, for example, a section upon parenting. A full 6 paragraphs have been clinging to notice about association contra causation, a counsel of which is thrown rught away to a breeze with a set of rarely indeterminate stabs during a causes of assorted correlations per parenting. The interpretation in theme comes from Levitt’s retrogression research of countless factors which required knowledge believes might fool around a tiny purpose in a educational result of children. So, for example, correlations were found in in between a child’s exam scores as great as a series of books a relatives have in their house, though not how mostly a relatives review to a child. So far, so good. The authors afterwards interpretation from identical datapoints which it is a inlet of a parents’ lives which change a child’s scores, not what a relatives do. Granted, it has a certain judicious appeal, though it amounts to no some-more than an prepared guess. What’s wrong with that? we might ask.
The problems with this e.g. spell out a tiny of a vital difficulties compared with amicable science. What we might notice about a correlations is which – by prerequisite – they miss a certain turn of detail. What *kind* of books to a relatives have? What kind do they review to their child? How mostly does a kid essentially collect up a singular of countless books? These have been questions for which there have been couple of or no unsentimental solutions. The reasons have been manifold, including: a series of interpretation points might never be sufficient (consider how many categories we might have to mangle predominating book sorts into: comic books, encyclopedias, TV trivia, etc.); we never know which exam theme is lying, exaggerating, or remembering incorrectly; as great as we can never be certain which exam scores have been a right thing to measure.
This final worry is done some-more impassioned when we cruise a following allude to from Freakonomics: “Sorry. Culture cramming might be a foundational idea of recurrent parenting, though a ECLS interpretation uncover no association in in between notable relic visits as great as exam scores.” There should be tiny warn during a miss of correlation: there have been really couple of things which a notable relic offers which would assistance upon a SATs or state exams. But which doesn’t meant which notable relic visits have no certain stroke upon a comprehension of a child. The authors have a inapplicable designation of equating exam scores to intelligence. It might really great be loyal which a kid which goes to museums will measure no improved upon opening exams than a kid which doesn’t, though it might start which hobbies they take up, their pursuit performance, as great as assorted alternative critical aspects of hold up which have tiny or zero to do with quantifiable intelligence.
Similar errors in meditative start via a book. In a bagel-seller example, census data have been weakly as great as bizarrely used to clear a position upon morality. Because usually 13% of people unsuccessful to compensate for bagels when left out with a remuneration box, a authors interpretation which a infancy – in fact, 87% – of people have an inherited honesty. we was floored by this kind of undiscriminating thinking. People might have paid out of fright of removing held or out of guilt, though not indispensably out of honesty. But some-more so than that, probity in a singular tiny area of hold up does not an honest male make. If Dubner as great as Levitt longed for to interpretation simply which census data is utilitarian for bargain tellurian motivation, which would be fine. But to have unconditional generalizations about either humans have been innate inherently great or inherently bad upon a singular investigate is simply irresponsible.
The usually certain thing to contend about Freakonomics is which it creates we think. But any argumentative book can do that. Though there have been a tiny sincerely plain examples in a book such as regards a genuine estate agents, a sumo wrestlers, as great as a intrigue teachers, altogether a book is undiscriminating of a own thinking. It would be excellent if Levitt as great as Dubner concurred which there might be alternative interpretations during slightest as great as their own, though they select instead to pontificate their own views, in extreme defilement of their avowed objectivism. And infrequently enough, we occur to determine with many of their views, only not with how they reached them. Levitt is obviously a shining man, as great as we goal he continues to shake out engaging statistical correlations upon surprising subjects… though he as great as Dubner ought to leave a interpretations to others.