Book Review Freakonomics Essay

In the book Freakonomics, written by economist Steven D. Levitt and journalist Stephen J. Dubne, the authors go through different parts of modern life to show how economics describes why people act a certain way as well as the way specific outcomes occur. They look into different aspects of society and view them with different perspectives. With the use of specific data and the fundamentals of economics, the very obscure comparisons and the different chapters in the book show correlation between economics and human nature. The main point of this book is to explain a few fundamental ideas through the answers of strange questions and how they play a major role in society.

​Freakonomics is a book that explores the many possibilities of why some things are the way they are. Principles of everyday life are examined and explained while Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner search for logic in statistical economics. This book answers the questions: how can things affect what people do, why are things the way they are, and why experts routinely make up statistics. This book highlights the commonalities between schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers as well as the Ku Klux Klan and real-estate agents, the life of drug dealers, criminals, and the art of parenting.

In chapter one of Freakonomics, Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt describe how when incentives are strong enough, many usually honest people from different walks of life will cheat in order to gain financially or climb the ladder in their careers. The authors define an incentive as “a means of urging people to do more of a good thing or less of a bad thing.” This chapter covers three varieties of incentives: Economic, Social and Moral. Economic incentives motivate people with the promise of money or goods. Social incentives motivate people to respond in a certain way because they care about how they will be viewed by others. Moral incentives motivate people on the basis of right and wrong. We look at four

The author Steven Levitt studied economics at Harvard University and MIT. He is primarily known for his work in the field of crime. The title Freakonomics means a study of economics based on the principles of incentives. The title is related to the book since he emphasizes how incentives drive and affect people’s actions. Although this book does not have a single theme, the main focus of the book is a new way of interpreting the world using economic tools. He explores incentives, information asymmetry, conventional wisdom, crime and abortion, and parenting throughout the six chapters of the book.

In chapter 2 of Freakonomics the main argument is that the absence of information can be used for personal gain. The main example used to display this tactic is when the KKK is compared to real estate agents. Although the crafty practice of real estate agents is in no way similar to the horrors of the KKK, they have a distinct similarity when it comes to the hoarding of information. The majority of the chapter focuses on the history of the KKK and Stetson Kennedy’s effort to stop it through the infiltration and exposure via radio of the Klan. Since the Klan was dependant on their violent—despite not being extremely violent—reputation, the disclosure of the information they had withheld from the public rendered them powerless. The narrators

“In the case of East Harlem, rising crime fears are accompanied by an obvious statistical explanation: Countering trends in most of the city, crime there has increased drastically. Over the past year, it has gone up by 17 percent, according to Police Department figures, with increases in rape, robbery and felony assault, among other transgressions.” (Bellafante)

The book’s fourth chapter, “Where have All the Criminals Gone?” in particular, includes several subjects the authors acknowledge will “provoke a variety of reactions, ranging from disbelief to revulsion, and a variety of objections” (140). By this point, readers already know the authors’ view that the legalization of abortion in Roe v. Wade caused the drop in crime during the 1990s because this idea first appears on page four. Rather than simply explaining why abortion lowered crime rates, Levitt and Dubner use a chart to introduce seven explanations commonly cited by experts for the sudden drop in crime during the 1990s, then examine the authenticity of each one. The first possible cause is “a fairly uncontroversial one: the strong economy”

After that introduction- they go on to tell the story of American crime in the 1990’s, and explore several other expert theories about the dramatic and unprecedented rise and fall of

The book Freakonomics by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, is designed to pose fundamental questions concerning economics using a variety of imaginative comparisons and questions. Examples of these comparisons and questions can be seen in the list of contents, with chapter titles such as “How is the Ku Klux Klan like a group of real-estate agents?” and “Why do drug dealers still live with their moms?” Not everyone is interested in economics, but with titles that grab attention, it is almost impossible not to pick up the book and read it for yourself. The two chapters of Freakonomics I will be analyzing are “What do Schoolteachers and Sumo Wrestlers have in common?” and “Perfect Parenting, Part II; or: Would a Roshanda by any other

Since the 1990s and the crime drop, there has been many questions to the reason why. Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner thoroughly looked through the different theories but came to a conclusion that the main reason crime had fallen is abortion (117-145). One of the reasons they discuss is whether or not the increase of incarceration affects the fluctuations in crime rates. Levitt and Dubner suggest that the crime system became relaxed due avoid racism; however, the crime rates then began to rise (122). “Between 1980 and 2000, there was a fifteenfold increase in the number of people sent to prison on drug charges” (Levitt, Dubner 123). The purpose of this review is to evaluate the validity of the incarceration effects on crime rates.

As I read through the introduction of “Freakonomics” by Stephen J. Dubner and Steve Levitt, I’m highly dissatisfied with the way the author opens the book. Personally, I felt like it was well written, but lacked appeal. To illustrate further, the book starts with information regarding the false predictions of criminologists of crime rates. However, my feelings are slightly positively changed as I find the author exposing “the hidden side of everything”, as he claims (which is also the theme of the book). For example, as he bypasses the information of the sky-high crime rate, he starts talking about a woman who changed crime rates by legalizing an abortion (which is illegal at the time). Sequentially, he explains how the crime-drop

In chapter 4 the chapter considers a variety of possible explanations for the significant drop in crime and crime rates that occurred in the 1990s. Based on articles that appeared in the country’s largest newspapers, the authors compile a list of the leading, commonly offered explanations. The next step is to systematically examine each explanation and consider whether available data support the explanation. What the authors, in fact, demonstrate is that in all but three cases–increased reliance on prisons, increased number of police, and changes in illegal drug markets–correlation was erroneously interpreted as causation and in some cases, the correlation wasn’t even that strong.

What they were all responding to was the force of Levitt’s underly- ing belief: that the modern world, despite a surfeit of obfuscation, complication, and downright deceit, is not impenetrable, is not un- knowable, and—if the right questions are asked—is even more in- triguing than we think. All it takes is a new way of looking. - Stephen J. Dubner.

There are many theories that attempt to explain the cause of criminal events. One such theory is routine activity theory developed by Lawrence Cohen and Marcus Felson in 1979. This theory was meant to fill the gaps in existing models that failed to adequately address rising crime rates during the 1960 's (Browning et al., 2000). Cohen and Felson suggested that crime should be thought of as an event that occurs at a specific location and time and involves specific people and/or objects (Felson,

In this paper I will discuss and explain anatomy of a crime decline in New York City as well as if in these days can we say that the city is safe. Purpose of this book " The City That Become Safe " written by Franklin E. Zimring is to show us how crime rate changed during 1990 to 2009. According to author this book presents a detailed profile of New York City crime over 20 years period. Book provides the vital statistics of the crime drop by type of crime, by borough, and by year. There are two reasons that such exhaustive detail is required as a beginning to the study. First, the size and the length of the drop are without precedent in the recorded history of American urban crime. The second reason that the details of the crime decline are needed is as a road map for explaining what changes in the city and its government might have caused this epic decline. The more we know about the specific character of the decline- when it happened, where it happened, which offenses- the better our capacity for sorting through different theories of what caused the drop. In addition, shifts the focus from the two decades of the decline to an assessment of current conditions in the city. How safe is New York City?.