Levitt, Steven, and Stephen Dubner - Freakonomics

[oyceter]

(subtitle: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything)

Um, it's probably rather shallow of me to admit that this book has been catching my eye for a while because I like the sound of "freakonomics" and I very much like the image of an apple with the interior of an orange.

Anyhow, thankfully, it turned out to be quite an entertaining read, if you like pop science type things. Levitt is apparently a very young and very inventive economist who likes applying the tools of economics to data points and trends in apparently unrelated things. Dubner has written an article (or more) on Levitt in the New Yorker. I rather wish that both authors or the editor had decided against excerpts of Dubner's articles in front of various sections of the book though. They're entirely too magazine-style and filled with hyperbole; also, it just smacks of unnecessary self-promotion. I'm already reading their book.

Despite the somewhat facile chapter introductions ("How are sumo wrestlers and Chicago schoolteachers alike?"), the book is actually a very interesting look at statistics and the different ways you can slice and dice numbers. Levitt comes to some fairly controversial conclusions, the most famous probably being that legalizing abortion helps cut down on the crime rate. As he says, morality is the study of how the world should be, while economics is the study of how the world is.

That said, Levitt doesn't use his conclusions to argue for or against any policies; he merely shows if they work or not with regard to a certain factor. For the abortion question, he does note that a fetus would have to be worth x amount of non-fetus human lives to justify using abortion as a tool for crime prevention, and that abortion's influence on crime is really a side benefit that probably shouldn't be the main goal.

I like the way Levitt thinks, and I like the way he and Dubnet explain how he gets to all his conclusions, startling though they may be. He uses statistics to see if he can detect an increase in teachers cheating after the "No Child Left Behind" act, explains the difference in how real estate agents sell other people's houses vs. how they sell their own, and uses very concrete, applicable examples to illustrate economic principles like side benefits and asymmetry of information and how they affect people daily.

I'm not sure if I agree with all his conclusions, given that I have very little background in this, but he did seem to be very thorough in explaining how he came to his conclusions, and he didn't just look at a single set of data in any case. He actually ended up thinking of even more ways to try to prove or disprove his hypotheses than I did.

Very educational in terms of thought process, very interesting, and most of all, a very fun and interesting read.

Links:
- rilina's review

Comments

[rheanna27.livejournal.com]

Weird coincidence - I bought this about a month ago and started reading it this week. I did a degree in economics (and hated it - I often wish I'd done just about anything else) but I'm enjoying the book, which is lively and interesting. Like you, though, I wish they hadn't reprinted bits of the article before the chapters, especially when the theme of the excerpts seemed to be, "Levitt is brilliant! He's a genius! See, if you get past the fact that he's a fusty, boring economist, he's actually hip and smart!" -- dude, that's what the rest of the book is there for. Let me read it and make up my own mind.

I'm spamming your LJ tonight, aren't I? Sorry!

[oyceter]

Worry not about spammage! I live for comments ;).

Oh cool! It's so neat that you can look at it with an actual knowledge of econ, as opposed to me, who took maybe two classes and slept through them.

[kate_nepveu]

Chad recently read this, and before it went back to the library, I looked at the bit about the economic structure of drug gangs--not the actual numbers, but the stuff about the data collection, which Chad mentioned and I thought was just fascinating. Why isn't _that_ a book, I want to know?

[oyceter]

I would totally read that!

[yhlee.livejournal.com]

Hijacking the post (hope you don't mind)--I just finished naominovik's Throne of Jade, and was wondering--would you be interested generally in doing a joint post of ranting thoughts on how sf/f (more fantasy than sf, I suspect) portrayals of the Orient are frequently problematic? We could cross-post or write paired posts or whatever. It'd be fun! :-)

[oyceter]

Ooooo, I would love that! What are you thinking of? (and I want to know... are there hair-tearing moments in Throne of Jade? I've been putting off reading it because I've been scared, despite adoring the first book)

[yhlee.livejournal.com]

Exoticization; the way that feudal class structures are practically assumed in fantasy (particularly Nippofantasies); the assumption of "inscrutability" (yes, this is informed by the war propaganda book you lent me).

I thought Throne of Jade was pretty good. I find the POV slightly annoying, but it's tight-third. Temeraire continues to have his own take on things, which provides a nice, believable counterbalance. And Laurence, for all his upbringing, does try to learn. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it; I don't think you'd find it particularly hair-tearing.

If we go sf it will inevitably turn to cyberpunk, and I'm not well-read enough in that genre to have useful things to say. But if you have sf things to say, that'd be awesome.

[oyceter]

(combining comments)

Yes! Books that I can think of off the top of my head: Tea with the Black Dragon, Hunting the Last Dragon by Sherryl Jordan, Daughter of the Empire trilogy, The Paladin, China Mountain Zhang (yay SF!), Paper Mage or whatever the book is called, etc.

I sadly don't know much cyberpunk at all, but China Mountain Zhang is SF! And good!

I haven't read Bridge of Birds yet, but I really want to!

[yhlee.livejournal.com]

Also, I can't remember--have you read Hughart's Bridge of Birds? I think it's hilarious since it's clear that it isn't pretending to be any form of "real" China, but I've heard others decry its treatment of Chinese mythologies. Since most of my knowledge is osmosis via Korean folklore, I'd rather get a more informed opinion.

[oyceter]

Oh, and! How could I have left out Kij Johnson's books? And Kara Dalkey's got Genpei, The Nightingale and Little Sister, though I haven't read any of them. I can find them in the library though.

Hrm, we should brainstorm more later!

[yhlee.livejournal.com]

I've read Fudoki and Fox Woman, and I've read Dalkey's The Nightingale (not bad so much as bland) and Little Sister (mmm).

One of the best portrayals I've seen is Geraldine Harris's unfortunately out-of-print and very hard to find White Cranes Castle--if you do find it, pick it up. At worst, you won't like it and I'll buy it off you. (My one copy is in storage. Somewhere.)

We could brainstorm at WisCon! Assuming there's time. Hee.

[oyceter]

Oooo, I will be on the lookout for the Harris!

And more brainstorming at Wiscon! Esp. after the panel on cultural appropriation.