Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Macroeconomics Study Guide
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
SuperFreakonomics, a New York Times Bestseller by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, that tries to explain important and sometimes difficult economic principles, for a non-economist. The book achieves this by incorporating humour, sarcasm and real life statistics to provide a deeper understanding of economics while still using layman’s terms. For the purposes of this paper, we’ll be exploring chapter two of SuperFreakonomics titled “Why Should Suicide Bombers Buy Life Insurance” and we will be breaking it down while relating the information back to the main concepts of McKenzie et al.’s, The New World of Economics.
Chapter two of SuperFreakonomics is probably the close related chapter to the original Freakonomics, just like the original, this
On the front cover of Freakonomics, the subheading reads, “A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything,” which is the purpose of the book. The economist Steven Levitt and the author Stephen Dubner wrote this book using several rhetorical devices to achieve that purpose. A few of those devices, style, ethos, pathos, and logos, were prominent within the book and helped to convey the message and purpose well.
The world is an increasingly tricky, sticky place. Mysteries present themselves every day; and in every way, people are puzzled and intrigued and on the hunt for answers. Steven D. Levitt, co-author of Freakonomics with Stephen J. Dubner, is one such person. Devoting his professional life to cracking the mysteries of seemingly mundane, and sometimes trivial, economic in daily life, Levitt jumps from assumption to decision, connecting dots in sometimes genius, sometimes haphazard, ways, and forming conclusions that occasionally defy conventional thought. Freakanomics gifts readers with several ideas to chew on and challenges deeply rooted thoughts.
In Dying To Win, Robert A. Pape challenges the views about why suicide terrorists do what they do and to whom. Pape is trying to convey that "suicide terrorism is rising around the world" (Pape pg. 6). Since many terrorist attacks have been perpetrated by Muslim terrorist motivated by religious beliefs, it makes people think that Islamic fundamentalism is the central cause. The connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism is incorrect, and encourage foreign countries to harm many Muslims people that are harmless. The author has assembled a database that accounts “every suicide bombing and attack around the globe from 1980 through 2003” (Pape pg. 7). There were 315 of terrorist suicide attacks at all.
Levitt states that the root of Economics is the study of incentives (Levitt 20) since scarcity causes Social-Darwinism by competition for resources that people want and need. But rather than presenting cases of incentives that serve their intend purposes Levitt displays cases in which incentives have failed and backfired. One example of such a case is when day-care centers in Haifa, Israel enacted a fine on parents who picked up their children late. They hope was to decrease the numbers of late parents but average of late parents actually doubled (Levitt 19-20). The reason was plain to see, the incentive was not big enough. The fine was only three dollars, less than that of a morning cup of coffee.
Chapter 26 focuses on people’s incomes and how they spend it, a lot of factors affect wealth and how it is spent, The chapter heavily takes into consideration economic growth and recessions and their ability to create a multiplier effect on the overall Gross Domestic Product of the nation. Various methods of spending one’s income are also covered in this chapter. This includes planned investments and unplanned investments.
While people think drug dealers earn a lot of money, it is actually only the people in the top of the pyramid who earn a lot of money. That is why most of the other drug dealers have to live with their moms.
They use a lot of explanations and data in the book making some of the passages easier to comprehend. However there formal wording style is sometimes difficult to follow especially when they begin to talk about very different subjects and how they are connected, which they do often in the book.
Rousmaniere, Peter. “Facing a tough situation.” Risk & Insurance 17.7 (June 2006): 24-25. Expanded Academic ASAP. Web. 23 March 2011.
A few years before the 2008 financial crisis saw a development of the markets. This was because of the widespread view that public good, freedom and prosperity were mostly governed and influenced by markets, and not the government. There was the belief that with market mechanisms, more could be achieved within the society. However, this is not the case. Currently, the market mechanism is constantly being questioned. This is due to the realization that with the belief in the markets, the society grows to be detached from morals and other social values. This calls for action in order to change this perspective. With the markets triumphing, there is constant failure in societal morals and values. However, a crisis such as the 2008 financial crisis
Michael Walzer is an esteemed retired professor from the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. Walzer has written many books, essays, and articles. His essay, Excusing Terror, is one that best relates to the current events happening around the world. In this essay, Walzer talks about different reasons that people would want to resort to terrorism. In this essay I will argue Walzers view on Terrorism is correct in that terrorism is wrong because it is akin to murder, it is random in who it targets, and no one has immunity. I will also offer an objection to Walzer’s theory and explain why it is not a valid one.
Singer’s argument may have swayed many people to donate their dispensable income to children in need despite the fact that it has many fundamental flaws. He argues that we should give away the majority of our earnings to charity. Since Singer wants the reader to donate such a large amount of money, the readers are given no choice but to contribute nothing whatsoever. His solution is not realistic and does not take into account the long-term financial impact this type of donation contribution system would have on a country’s economy.
Freakonomics has been an incredibly interesting read and opens up with, what appears to the reader to be, a writing style that somehow personifies the text in a way that only the book itself can articulate. The authors, Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, do an amazing job describing basic economic concepts and rules using intriguing and nontypical examples all while entertaining facts and figures that leave the reader with a dropped jaw. The economist, Levitt, received his bachelors degree in economics from Harvard University, his Ph.D. from M.I.T., and has been a professor of economics at the Chicago School of Law since 1997. On the opposite side of the cover, the award-winning writer, journalist, TV and radio personality, Dubner, has
The fourth chapter of Dubner and Levitt’s Superfreakonomics, The Fix is in, discusses how the modern world has improved significantly from the past. Even though people continue to complain about exactly the opposite, the authors set out to explain that the world has indeed enhanced and simple and cheap solutions to costly problems are the reason for it.
Today, more than ever, there is great debate over politics and which economic system works the best. How needs and wants should be allocated, and who should do the allocating, is one of the most highly debated topics in our current society. Be it communist dictators defending a command economy, free market conservatives defending a market economy, or European liberals defending socialism, everyone has an opinion. While all systems have flaws and merits, it must be decided which system is the best for all citizens. When looking at both the financial well being of all citizens, it is clear that market economies fall short on ensuring that the basic needs of all citizens are met. If one looks at liberty and individual freedom, it is evident that command economies tend to oppress their citizens. Therefore, socialism, which allows for basic needs to be met and personal freedoms to be upheld, is the best economic system for all of a country’s citizens.
Sacerdote, B. (2000). The nature and nurture of economic outcomes. National Bureau of Economic Research, J0(12), 344-376.