SuperFreakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes, and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance

If you liked their first book, you'll like this one too. More usages of "economics" in odd, human situations, like prostitution and terrorism, etc.

Of course, is it economics if it isn't about the economy? If it's about human behavior, isn't it something different? "Psychology/sociology with mathematics and statistics"? "Microeconomics"? (p. 211). Or "freakonomics"? But what if it isn't freaky? Just normal?

Anyway, I don't always agree with the idea that numbers can tell us everything about human beings. Numbers are rational and human beings are often irrational. And sometimes even the biases of the author show. As good liberals, the authors have to say women are discriminated against, even in pay (pp. 20-22). (Of course, they make the show more simple economic mistake of adding up male salaries and adding up female salaries and dividing by workers.) But then they admit later that most women have different priorities than men which accounts for most, if not all of the supposed pay gap (pp. 43-46).

But, eye-openingly, is their chapter on global warming (chap. 5). They accept that the globe is warming and that it is probably warming partially because of human actions. Okay. But they point out that humans only contribute about 2% of atmospheric carbon dioxide. And that requiring the US and the developed world to stop carboning and letting developing nations (like China and India) to keep polluting is unfair and wouldn't work. And getting everyone to quit carbon would not be fair to the nations that haven't had the chance to develop yet is unfair and wouldn't work. They point out that volcanoes pollute more. And lower the temperature. So the authors don't really buy the proposals most people have to "fix" the issue. The ideas, like Gore's (or in 2020, the Green New Deal) would cost quadrillions of dollars. And probably wouldn't work. They offer a bunch of relatively cheap solutions to global warming, all of which cost less than $1 billion and would be pretty easy to do. A good chapter.

The epilogue on monkeys was cute and interesting. Notes and index. show less

In their follow-up book to Freakonomics, Steven D. Levitt (economist) and Stephen J. Dubner (journalist) explore the microeconomics behind such diverse topics as prostitution, the banking preferences of terrorists, and whether a simple, elegant solution can be found to global warming.

Like the first book, this takes on diverse topics, and gives lots of numbers but doesn't always have an ultimate solution. That being said, the conversation starters themselves are fascinating, and make you look at real life situations - like giving away money to charity or other potentially altruistic endeavors - in new ways. The audio is read by co-author Stephen Dubner; he does a good job for a non-actor (probably aided by the fact this is nonfiction), show more so it added to the experience to hear one of them, especially showing the dry sense of humor that doesn't always come out clearly in text. show less

The claim to fame of these two is that they can make economics interesting to the lay person and boy, do they succeed. Following on the success of Freakonomics (which looked at why your average drug dealer lives at home with his mum amongst other things), the pair are back with Superfreakonomics. But wait there’s more! The edition I read was the illustrated version, which is filled with colour pictures, graphs, extended chapters and more. (How it compares to the original book I’m not certain, as I didn’t check between them in store – this hardcover version was on sale). Having the illustrations really helped to grasp the knowledge – not just economical knowledge, but general knowledge as well.

The book covers a wide range of show more topics – from medical (how you should rate doctors, hand hygiene, how to build the most efficient emergency department) to social (sizes of condoms in India and why people watched as a woman was murdered). Somehow, through many, many links, there is a link established on why suicide bombers should buy life insurance (it involves probability and algorithms – explained in an easy fashion). It is amusing, witty and thought-provoking. In general, each chapter contains a wide range of topics that lead to the eventual question being or demonstrating the main topic in different fashions. The last chapter on climate change was a bit dry for my tastes. It wasn’t so much the science, which was easy to understand, but the lack of changes in topic and zany linkages. It was, quite serious and not quite in the same tone as the rest of the book. It was also interesting to see the backtracking as the authors proved that child restraints weren’t safer in a crash, but told you to use them anyway (think of the lawsuits!) This book doesn’t pretend to be the voice of truth, nor should it be viewed as such.

Fun, pop culture. It won’t help you pass an economics course (believe me, I tried), but it’s interesting reading, if only for the general knowledge and random facts.

http://samstillreading.wordpress.com show less

How can you say something so controversial and yet so mundane? Levitt and Dubner's sequel to their economics-orientated pop-think book is as interesting and as intellectual as ever. They shed light on the hidden sides to the everyday economics of decisions - but this book isn't about economics. It's a multidisciplinary approach to tackling one key thing: Why do people make the decisions we make? In a way, everything is purchasing - time, effort, the environment. Everything is a transaction, and our duo write an amazing explainer of the subtleties that make mass murderers, or prostitutes, or seatbelt-wearers, or suicide-bombers, or doctors who don't wash their hands. Or... Monkeys that engage in prostitution.


Everything is economical, show more but not everything is rational. And this book will show you why. show less

Whether you agree or disagree with the authors' conclusions, this book and the prequel, Freakonomics, encourage the reader to challenge "conventional wisdom" and to apply scientific analysis and data-driven critical thinking to real world issues. As an educator (and as someone with degrees in both science and the humanities), this is a cause I have devoted huge chunks of my life to championing. The book sheds light on just how easily and often we humans allow ourselves to be manipulated by ignorance, complacency, innate behaviour/psychology or deliberate malfeasance into making decisions that harm our self-interest, our communities, our environment, and our world.

On the other hand, the book spends approximately the same amount of show more time/space exploring how, with the application of scientific method and critical thinking, ignorance can be surmounted and solutions - sometimes shockingly simple and obvious solutions - to problems both inconsequential (walking while drunk) and profound (global warming) can be identified.

All this, and a completely entertaining read to boot! The authors eschew convoluted language and make extensive use of humor to hammer their points home. Highly, highly recommended ... in fact, if I ruled the world, this would be a required reading in every U.S. high school! show less

I LOVED Freakonomics. As an economics major in college, I found it to be absolutely fascinating reading about behavioral economics. Superfreakonomics is more of the same, but not quite as gripping as the original. It addresses topics ranging from the wages of prostitutes to the difficult task of getting health care workers to wash their hands. The underlying theme of these books is how incentives change behavior . . .and you can kinda extrapolate how there are SO many unintended consequences from rules and regulations instituted by the government. Definitely a fast paced and interesting read, but if you haven't read it, then start with Freakonomics.

If you've read the first Freakonomics book, you can expect this to be basically more of the same: odd applications of "economic thinking" to various unexpected aspects of society. In this case, as the subtitle indicates, those include discussions of the economics of prostitution, profiling terrorist suspects based on (among other things) their financial activity, and the possibility of cheap and simple means of reversing global warming.

As is probably obvious from that list of subjects, the authors deliberately aim to be a little controversial and provocative. They even say in the introduction that they expect readers to find things in the book to argue about and would feel disappointed if they didn't. Well, in that respect, they are show more successful, as there were several things I certainly wanted to argue with, most notably a few instances which left me wanting to shout, "Look, just because something makes sense in terms of economic statistics, that doesn't automatically make it ethically acceptable!" Which isn't necessarily a bad thing; it's thought-provoking, which no doubt is the desired result. And the writing is very breezy and readable. Almost a bit too breezy in places, perhaps, as its treatment of some topics feels rather slight, but entertaining enough. show less