Container Top
Search

Events Calendar

EVENT SEARCH:

In This Section


Most Read Stories


Blogs:


First Bell - On Education:
No City of Akron basketball tonight

Pets:
Pet telethon re-airs

The Heldenfiles:
Chipmunks "Squeakquel" on DVD/BD March 30

Akron Zips:
Late surge gives Zips ugly road win

Tribe Matters:
Blogmail response on Hafner

Cleveland Browns:
Stallworth's contract terminated

Balanced Ledger:
QB in Browns future: another mock draft

Kent State Sports:
KSU Notes – February 9

Cleveland Cavaliers:
NBA Power Rankings from Around the Internet

Buckeye Blogging:
Buckeyes grab 18 players on signing day

Varsity Letters:
Garfield at Buchtel basketball

All Da King's Men:
Palin At The Tea Party Convention

Blog of Mass Destruction:
Republican Pre-Conditions

Akron Law Café:
Citizens United v. F.E.C. (Part 4): Kennedy's and O'Connor's Basic Approaches to Constitutional Decisionmaking – Top Down and Bottom Up

Car Chase:
Collector Car Hobby Loses One of the Best—Jim Roll

Let's Talk Real Estate:
Decisions Decisions: Credit Cards or Your Mortgage?

Ohio Travels with Betty:
Loucile is looking for a Lake Erie getaway in June for three kids, ages 1, 3, and 5.

Sound Check:
Talk of the Town – Top entertainment picks for the weekend

HRLite House:
Track HR Research

Akron Gamer:
Makers of 'Castle Crashers' unveil 'BattleBlock Theater'

See Jane Style:
Do IT this week: Layering

More numbers and unexpected conclusions

'Superfreakonomics' has entertaining take on economics

By Dinesh Ramde
Associated Press

In their 2005 book Freakonomics, economist Steven D. Levitt and journalist Stephen J. Dubner used dozens of anecdotes to prove a simple point: ''People respond to incentives.''

The authors are no exception. After the book sold more than 4 million copies, they doubtless realized how lucrative a follow-up book would be.

So they followed the same model for SuperFreakonomics. It works just as well the second time around.

Their strategy is simple — crunch numbers about mundane topics to reveal interesting, unexpected conclusions. That's how we get answers to questions we never thought to ask.

It turns out, for example, that prostitutes tend to make more money when they have pimps. Muslim women who observe the one-month fast of Ramadan early in their pregnancy are more likely to have children with certain cognitive disabilities. Some people who are rushed to emergency rooms might have been better off if they had stayed home.

The real point is to make the science of economics a little more fun — if you learn how to ask the right questions, numbers can give intriguing answers.

The topics are often random and mashed together in a series of tangentially related vignettes. But the writing is deft and seamless enough to keep SuperFreakonomics entertaining.

For most readers, the book will provide plenty of water-cooler fodder but not much else. The deeper message is for politicians and other decision makers.

Plenty of decisions get made based on emotion or common sense, the authors say, but that's not always helpful when the numbers tell a different story.

For example, chemotherapy is brutal, expensive and only marginally effective. Yet Levitt and Dubner say doctors keep prescribing it because they have an incentive to offer their patients every option, and lawmakers continue to fund its research because they have an incentive to look tough on cancer.

The situation won't change until and unless the incentives change, they say. It's not a groundbreaking point, but it's made in clear and simple terms.

For the most part, the authors come across as folks who would make for great conversation at a cocktail party. But that changes in a later chapter, when they discuss the environment.

They interview a group of scientists who propose radical solutions to extreme weather — floating pontoons to drive warm ocean water down to inhibit the formation of hurricanes, and a giant ''garden hose to the sky'' to pump sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere to replicate the global-cooling effect of volcanic eruptions.

Here the authors seem to abandon the relative impartiality of their previous chapters. They give the scientists free rein to describe and defend their theories, even though the proposals are radical enough to deserve stronger scrutiny.

Certainly the authors have the right to insert their own viewpoints. But the effect is a little disappointing, when the previous chapters were written with a more academic perspective.

The authors don't seem to mind criticism. In the introduction, they say they'll be disappointed if the book doesn't start some quarrels.

But most of the book will draw interest, not antagonism. SuperFreakonomics isn't necessarily super or freaky, but it does make economic analysis a little less dismal.

In their 2005 book Freakonomics, economist Steven D. Levitt and journalist Stephen J. Dubner used dozens of anecdotes to prove a simple point: ''People respond to incentives.''

Get the full article here.


Story tools

Email  Email   Print  Print   Save  Save   Reprint  Reprint   Popular  Most Popular   Reprint  Subscribe

Share this story

AddThis Social Bookmark Button














Most Commented Stories