Evaluation of Freakonomics
Your Name Here
Your Professor’s Name Here
Class Name Here
10 April 2009
Analysis and Critique of Freakonomics by Steven Levitts Steven Levitts takes an interesting spin on economics in his book, Freakonomics. He uses the tools that are unique to the field of economics to answer several bizarre questions that he has formulated, and despite their bizarre nature, Levitts manages to use ordinary information to substantiate the equally bizarre answers to those questions. He begins the introduction with a shocking theory on the cause of the decline in crime in the 1990’s: Roe vs. Wade. The children, who were most likely to be the cause of a rise in crime, were instead aborted (Levitts 4). Without fear, Levitts flows directly into the theory that real estate agents are out for their own incentives, even at the detriment of their clients. Levitts uses evidence from data collected in regards to real estate agents selling their own homes versus data in regards to real estate agents selling their clients homes to back this theory, and makes a very good argument. This is an avenue to bring to the forefront his point of the advantage of expert information, or information asymmetry. His next introduction example is money in politics. Levitts uses this example to explain how conventional wisdom is often wrong, and the evidence is present in his example of how money really has no bearing on the outcome of a political election. Levitts also stresses that while he does mention many different concepts do not look for a unifying theme as there is not one. The first chapter of Freakonomics addresses what school teachers and sumo wrestles could possibly have in common, which turns out to be cheating. Using data from standardized tests and from data collected regarding sumo wrestlers, Levitts confirms that both school teachers and sumo wrestlers have their reasons for cheating. He also discusses the different avenues that can be taken to accomplish this cheating. Levitts prime
Your Professor’s Name Here
Class Name Here
10 April 2009
Analysis and Critique of Freakonomics by Steven Levitts Steven Levitts takes an interesting spin on economics in his book, Freakonomics. He uses the tools that are unique to the field of economics to answer several bizarre questions that he has formulated, and despite their bizarre nature, Levitts manages to use ordinary information to substantiate the equally bizarre answers to those questions. He begins the introduction with a shocking theory on the cause of the decline in crime in the 1990’s: Roe vs. Wade. The children, who were most likely to be the cause of a rise in crime, were instead aborted (Levitts 4). Without fear, Levitts flows directly into the theory that real estate agents are out for their own incentives, even at the detriment of their clients. Levitts uses evidence from data collected in regards to real estate agents selling their own homes versus data in regards to real estate agents selling their clients homes to back this theory, and makes a very good argument. This is an avenue to bring to the forefront his point of the advantage of expert information, or information asymmetry. His next introduction example is money in politics. Levitts uses this example to explain how conventional wisdom is often wrong, and the evidence is present in his example of how money really has no bearing on the outcome of a political election. Levitts also stresses that while he does mention many different concepts do not look for a unifying theme as there is not one. The first chapter of Freakonomics addresses what school teachers and sumo wrestles could possibly have in common, which turns out to be cheating. Using data from standardized tests and from data collected regarding sumo wrestlers, Levitts confirms that both school teachers and sumo wrestlers have their reasons for cheating. He also discusses the different avenues that can be taken to accomplish this cheating. Levitts prime