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

I suspect a lot of the people that give this a low grade are disguising their disgust that the former "cool kids" that took down Real Estate agents and compared drug gangs to the big corporate struggle dared to take on the orthodoxy of global warming and the patron Saint Al Gore. The chapter about

Show More

possible solutions to global warming is worth the read. It is refreshing to read something other than the two religious extremes (it doesn't exist, it is the end of the world) and the explanations make sense.

People from the church of Al Gore are too savvy to put that in their reviews, but I expect that is where the disappointment comes from.

"We loved Freakonomics when it supported what we believe."
"Super Freakonomics is lame because it questions what I believe!"

Show Less

2 words that describe the book―Freaky Economics (Duh!)

3 characters I met

* Nathan Myhrvold, a former Microsoft executive, is one of the co-founders of Intellectual Ventures (IV)—an invention company that has come up with a variety of creative and affordable fixes for a variety of problems,

Show More

ranging from hurricanes (they could literally stop them!) and global warming. It boggled my mind that a group of people like those found at IV exist—and they’ve found solutions for huge problems that are available RIGHT NOW! Learning about why these solutions are not being implemented was fascinating as well as a bit upsetting.

* Allie—a self-made woman who runs her own profitable business, which just happens to be as a $300 an hour prostitute. We meet Allie in the chapter on the economics of prostitution, which explains (among other things) why oral sex got so cheap. (During this particular chapter, you could be forgiven for thinking “Would being a prostitute really be such a bad job?” But, as you read on, you’ll quickly be relieved of this idea.)

* Keith Chen, an associate professor of economics at Yale, who attempted to find out “What would happen if I could teach a bunch of monkeys to use money?” What he finds is fascinating—and allowed Chen to have the distinction of seeing the “first instance of monkey prostitution in the recorded history of science.” I TOLD you this book was about freaky economics!

4 things I liked or disliked about the book

* I was a huge fan of the first Freakonomics book so when I saw there was a follow-up, I knew I had to read it. As with the first book, Superfreakonomics is packed with interesting information. However, I found it to be more scattered and less cohesive than the first book. At times, it was hard to remember that this book had anything at all to do with economics. It often felt more like a “check out the weird research this guy did!” Yet I’d still recommend it. As far as economics books go, you won’t find many that are more accessible or engaging.

* I liked how the topics ranged all over the place. Consider this partial list of topics covered in the book: the perils of walking drunk, prostitution, the male-female wage gap, the worst month to have a baby, the trickle down effects of September 11th, telling a good doctor from a bad one, how to postpone death, the Kitty Genovese murder, the roots of altruism, kidney donation in Iran, the Endangered Species Act, dead whales, the history of seatbelts, hurricanes, global warming, the Club versus LoJack, why hand washing matters, and (of course) monkey prostitution.

* Although I liked the wide range of topics covered, this did result in a scattershot feeling. Lots of stuff is discussed, but the text jumps from one to the other so quickly that I had a hard time remembering what I was reading or had read. In fact, going back to write this review some months after reading this book, I kept thinking to myself “I don’t really remember that. They talked about kidney donation in Iran? Oh yeah … that was interesting. Kitty Genovese? Who was that? Oh…that’s right. Now I remember.” Yet, despite this flaw, it was still a fast and interesting read.

* Of all the things I read about in this book, the one that made me crazy was that there are solutions for major problems that could be implemented RIGHT NOW but aren’t due to a variety of political and economic reasons. I’m sure residents of Florida, Louisiana and other areas plagued by hurricanes would be quite interested in learning about the low-tech, low-cost technology that could potentially prevent hurricanes from forming and wreaking havoc.

5 stars or less for my rating:

I’m giving the book 4 stars. Just like the first Freakonomics book, this book was a fast-paced and interesting read. If you detest economics and couldn’t imagine voluntarily reading a book about economics, I’m here to tell you should make an exception for this series. Although the book felt a bit scattered and less focused than the first book, I’d still recommend it. If you’re a fan of accessible non-fiction, this book is a must read. And, if you have the misguided idea that non-fiction books are boring or dry, this book will change your mind. I mean, it talks about MONKEY PROSTITUTION!

Show Less

I am a fan of the previous "Freakonomics" book by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dunbar so I knew what to expect when I began "Superfreakonomics: Global Cooling, Patriotic Prostitutes, and Why Suicide Bombers Should Buy Life Insurance." The book's tantalizing subtitle displays the overall tone and

Show More

subject matter of the book: an irreverent look at topical issues, using humor and common sense to debunk some of the most common assumptions most of us have made about our world. Much as the first book, "Superfreakonomics" is fun to read and will leave the reader wondering why relationships that make so much sense come as such a surprise to the rest of us.

Some of what the authors say will scare the reader and some of it will make him laugh and feel better about the world. In either case, however, the reader is not likely to forget what he learns, nor is he likely ever again to look at that part of the world the way he looked at it before beginning "Superfreakonomics." The authors tackle big, important topics that affect all of us as well as subjects which, although they might have no impact on our individual lives, are intriguing because of how the authors present them through surprising facts and relationships that change what we thought we knew.

One of the more terrifying chapters in "Superfreakonomics" involves the astounding number of patients that die in hospital from causes unrelated to the treatment they sought there in the first place. The authors, via statistics, interviews and observation, determine why secondary infection is still such a problem in American hospitals and who is responsible for spreading the infection to unsuspecting patients. The "who" is not so surprising; it is the "why" that will anger most readers. The chapter also explores the "luck of the draw" involved in doctor-assignments to emergency room patients - with surprising revelations about which doctor offers the patient the best chance of survival.

Other topics covered include: the relative ineffectiveness of chemotherapy, why prostitutes make more money for less work on one particular night of the week, why switching to kangaroo burgers could help save the world, a comparison of seat belts to car seats for children two and up, and a possible solution to the global warming problem that the world can actually afford (but is likely to be ignored because it will be repugnant to those too "green" to consider it.

"Superfreakonomics" might not be a book for everyone (even if there is such a thing) but readers should not be put off by its title and subject matter. This book is fun to read and it will give its readers something to talk about at the next boring party or group dinner - topics that are likely to dominate the conversation for the rest of the evening.

Rated at:5.0

Show Less

The anecdotes, quotes, statistics, and experiments are all absolutely fascinating. Sadly, the conclusions the authors draw from these things are very often completely incorrect and pointed out ad nauseum by those far more intelligent and expert than myself.

Interesting tidbits of useless information for the average person. Probably would be more interesting for students studying economics and psychology. I learned more about prostitution than I ever actually wanted to know.

A interesting read, especially the stuff about prostitution and monkeys using money. What let the book down was the love-in that the authors see to have developed with the people who worked for IV.

While this book contains little tidbits of information, it is far from the teaching and referencing tool that the original book was. It almost seems like this book was an after thought compiled with information that was leftover from the first book's research.

Omm! They're going to be in sooooo much trouble for their heresy against the anthropogenic global warming orthodoxy - especially their for advocacy of geo-engineering solutions to the problem and their downplaying of carbon mitigation strategies in particular.

There's a ton of other provocative

Show More

insights and perspectives in the book that have nothing to do climate science. Though Levitt & Dubner - along with Malcolm Gladwell - run the risk of propagating a cult of the counter-intuitive where no apple cart is safe & a flowing writing style full of engaging anecdotes mask what is fundamentally a parlor game.

Show Less

A great follow-up to the original. Thought provoking and a fast read. Just like the original there are some great topics that really make you wonder about the world we live in.

This is a great book to listen to while driving in ones car. I did that with Freakonomics and enjoyed this book in the same manner. The sequel probably isn't quite as fascinating as the original, but it's pretty darned close. These two guys have a really unique way of looking at why things work as

Show More

they do in the world. They also have their fingers on the pulse of some fascinating solutions being considered for global warming. If you have an interest in why the world works as it does, I'd highly recommend this book.

Show Less

Great critical thinking deserves our following and these guys do it again. This book runs a little more rambling than their first outing but no doubt many readers will appreciate the extra detail and hover over every significant finding. The book produces an outcome of thinking that leans to the

Show More

cynical: Everything accepted by the mainstream is proven futile. How, then, to get the mainstream out of the mainstream and into a more productive current? There is the unanswered question of the book. Perhaps the answer is; us, the now-enlightened readers.

PS: Not as many delectable anecdotes as their first but still lots of chewy details.
:)

Show Less

I love love loved Freakonomics -- it was the first time I ever thought economics could be interesting...sexy even.

This book, while in the same vein, lacked the sizzle that the first one did. There were still interesting stats and comparisons, but I honestly couldn't remember if they were stories

Show More

from the first book, a Malcolm Gladwell book, or really new. And I guess that was my biggest beef - this book didn't seem as "new" as the first one. Or maybe I'm just becoming a jaded, bitter middle-aged woman. Maybe Levitt & Dubner can use me as an example in their next book, SuperDuperFreakonomics.

Show Less

Subtitled "Global Cooling, patriotic prostitutes, and why suicide bombers should buy life insurance." Like Freakonomics before it, this book is a fascinating look at the world around us through a lens of economics. The global warming chapter does have sensible things to say (there is more to global

Show More

warming than just the carbon dioxide cycle), an analysis of how to ameliorate the hurricane effects, what capuchin monkeys buy when given a money economy (yes, the oldest profession does figure into it), the economics of prostitution over the last century, as well as through several neighborhoods in one modern town, how one might use various indicators to help locate terrorists on home soil, and so on. Fascinating analyses.

Show Less

This was less good than the first volume. Partly, I've already read an economics book this year, and I've had enough of oversimplified explanations of - and fixes for - externalities (I have an economics degree, FFS!) Partly, the choice of topics is more political than I seem to remember from the

Show More

first volume. Partly, the writing flows less well. It feels like Levitt and Dubner found a bunch of cool stuff they wanted to put into the book and just shoved it in, whether it fit or not. I have no issues with there being no overarching theme, but the chapter on hospitals and suicide bombers really shouldn't be one chapter. And what exactly does the gender pay gap have to do with prostitution? And why isn't there an economist out there who dares write something serious and extensive about the gender pay gap in a popular science book? The final chapter (on global warming) makes my skin crawl, but that's mostly down to 'special' issues I personally have with a set-up like Intellectual Ventures. And there are one or two cases of blatant one-sided coverage of the evidence. They should know better.

Still, some interesting thoughts in here.

Bechdel: See above comment on the gender pay gap. Spectacular fail. (No, prostitutes don't count, though the research is fascinating.)

Show Less

The sequel to Freakonomics, an intriguing look at the economic reality around us, this, too, is a lively, fascinating book. Are all the suppositions made in the book true? The detail of study doesn't allow indepth examination (the TV market growth in the 50s related to increasing crime rates of the

Show More

70s doesn't seem to include any other demographics of those children other than television viewing, for instance).
The good, the bad, the intended and unintended . . . and the cheap and easy we seem to avoid.

Show Less

If you liked Freakonomics, then you will like this book. It's more of the same. The book is good, but like most sequels it does not equal the original. Since the original, Malcolm Gladwell and others have been exploring the same space and writing similar things.

It's good to write about economics in

Show More

a simple, easy to understand manner. There are lots of options now.

Show Less

Covering everything from prostitution to global warming, this book is nothing if not thought-provoking. I have not read its precursor, Freakonomics, so can make no comparison to that, but very much appreciated this one. This book challenges much of mainstream thinking on various subjects. Is

Show More

chemotherapy helpful, how effective is profiling, is your child safer in a car seat, should you compare your Realtor to a pimp?

I've read some of the other reviews, and it seems that quite a few people are personally offended, especially by the section on global warming. The book doesn't depute that climate change exists, it addresses some different thinking towards it. Therefore, it makes enemies from both camps: those who think there is no detrimental climate change and those who think the proposed and mostly unsuccessful mainstream fixes are the only way to go. Whether people love or hate the book, I don't think anyone can read the whole thing without at least challenging or defending what they have been thinking, and there is a great deal of worth in anything that makes us think. On top of that, this is a thoroughly entertaining book.

Show Less

Levitt and Dubner faced some pretty spectacularly high expectations for the sequel to Freakonomics. And while Superfreakonomics is also chock-full of "Hey listen, this is awesome!" tidbits that made its predecessor so much fun to read, it also simply didn't hang together as well. This may have been

Show More

because of Freakonomics's transition to a blog format that dictated its address of content, or the undoubtedly shaky political and economic climate causing tensions about subject matter and solutions.

While there are a myriad of themes throughout, one of the most overarching ones was that people more-or-less always respond only to sufficient self-interested incentives. Whether it's citizens in first world countries donating money to natural disaster-stricken third world countries to assuage their guilt, or doctors who don't care about washing their hands between patients because it's not the doctor's own health on the line, altruism is apparently dead. The thing is, of course that's going to be the conclusion drawn by economics, which measures value and incentives and not ~feelings.~

The topics are far more politically-charged than Freakonomics, and the particular political bent is pretty blatant. There is a section about targetting potential terrorists by algorithms that track their bank account activity. This was really interesting, except that it seemed to come down heavily in favor of racial profiling. Even more egregious for many readers, I assume, will be the chapter that's basically a refutation of anthropogenic global warming, or at least its severity. Scientists are working on methods which will negate the carbon dioxide humanity is pumping into Earth's atmosphere, which is awesome and more pro-active than just pleading with people to buy reusable grocery bags or stop driving their Hummers around the neighborhood or whatever.

But the casual dismissal, if not scorn, with which global warming is treated struck me as so careless and selfish. The "Well, *somebody's* going to fix it someday" mentality has caused too many environmental problems as it is, so I really don't think Levitt and Dubner's same approach to global warming would be conducive to fixing anything. People are simple and selfish, this gets argued in topic after topic in Superfreakonomics. Unfortunately, not only is this an incomplete encapsulation of people's emotional decision-making abilities, but also a bleak and distasteful approach to economics and politics generally.

Show Less

I read Freakonomics a few years ago and still follow the New York Times' Freakonomics blog daily, so I was thrilled to see that another book was out. Like its predecessor, Superfreakonomics looks at every day situations and breaks them down logically to see what really makes us tick. The unintended

Show More

effects of our decisions (and legislation) can be both tragic and comical. After you read this you will never look at the world the same way again.

Show Less

If you liked Freakonomics, you'll want to read Superfreakonomics. More of that freaky economics is included. I was surprised by the amount of gender-related stories that were in here. The reason behind improvements in the fate of girls and women in India. If it's better to have a pimp or not if

Show More

you're a prostitute. Why at one point in time, in one hospital, it was safer to have your baby delivered by a female midwife than a male doctor. And other stories like that.The style is highly readable, occasionally funny, and just pulls you along until before you know it, the book is done.Which is the main problem. The last big chapter is about global warming, and I didn't see how that had too much to do with the economics they'd been talking about in previous chapters. It almost felt like they were trying to preach their newfound viewpoint. I found it much less interesting, much less compelling. And I think partly that had to do with the global warming not being grounded as much in human behavior. We didn't learn any neat insights into the motivations of human beings.At the end of that chapter, I was ready to get back to an interesting people-focussed story. But.. the book was done.There's only 200 pages unless you count the footnotes. And I was almost so hungry for more, just one or two stories more, something, that I considered reading all the footnotes. But I was also annoyed at the authors for it being so short and them taking up my time with the global warming stuff (which would've been fine, btw, if I'd read it in another book, because it was interesting in a different way), that I didn't read the footnotes. Rather, endnotes, I guess I should say.So, good, but ultimately unsatisfying.

Show Less

Another book title that is so long that I must remark: Need I say more? Not sure of the validity of all this info, but it is definitely a fun read.

It's not as interesting as their first book - guess they rode too closely on their own coattails? Anyway, it's similar to the first book - though the 'stories' are longer so there are fewer of them. And about 1/3 of the book is about global warming, complete with the authors' political feelings on

Show More

the subjects.

Show Less

An interesting and quick read. Raises some interesting ideas and looks at some old problems with a fresh perspective. Not brilliantly written, but the style is easy to read.

Entertaining as the previous book "Freakonomics" but a bit more 'scattered' in terms of content (the last chapter on global warming seems really out of place). The economic analysis of prostitution seems a bit callous (what percentage of prostitutes really are high-end escorts? if that percentage

Show More

is small, shouldn't the discussion be a bit more concentrated on the average situation?). A good read for a short flight if you pick it up at the airport but I wouldn't recommend it more generally.

Show Less