SuperFreakonomics, Illustrated edition
Most survivors of Economics 101 leave the course feeling no great urgency to pick up a book on the subject as leisure reading. One very unconventional book changed that: Steven D. Levitt's 2005 Freakonomics became an international bestseller, racking up sales of more than four million copies....
show more
Most survivors of Economics 101 leave the course feeling no great urgency to pick up a book on the subject as leisure reading. One very unconventional book changed that: Steven D. Levitt's 2005 Freakonomics became an international bestseller, racking up sales of more than four million copies. Fans have waited eagerly for this follow-up and, fortunately, it doesn't disappoint. Like its predecessor, SuperFreakonomics explores "the hidden side of everything." In this case, the roster of improbable topics includes the similarities between streetwalkers and department store Santas; the most effective ways to catch terrorists; whether eating kangaroos can save the planet; correlations between television viewing and crime; and whether we're hardwired for altruism and selfishness.
show less
Format: ebook
ISBN:
9780062042514 (0062042513)
Publish date: October 26th 2010
Publisher: HarperCollins
Pages no: 304
Edition language: English
Series: Freakonomics (#2)
I listened to the audiobook version of this via Hoopla Digital. It was fun, just as the other books in the series have been.
Incredible, fast, entertaining read. Thinkers like this one occasionall remind me just why I have chosen my profession.Short Synopsis (Q):Putting the Freak in EconomicsIn which the global financial meltdown is entirely ignored in favor of more engaging topics.The perils of walking drunk…The unlikely...
Really short and kind of unfocused but still an interesting book.
A case of a movie being better than the book. Okay, the movie was based on Freakonomics and not this, but still.Honesty, if you are going to write about prostitution, you should look at more than just one city.Still some of it was intersting. Not upset that I either brought or read it.
Some parts a little amusing, most parts ideological bullshit posing as 'objective' science. They should have at least stayed in their own field (microeconomics). Not very credible in topics such as health care or climate change.