Freakonomics : A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything

[Hamlette]

Wonderful read. Not necessarily political but some interesting stuff which will challenge conventional wisdom.

For instance, he thinks the dramatic drop in crime in the 1990s was due to legalized abortion. Kids who are not wanted are more likely to "go astray." (He makes a pretty good argument.)

Do we pay too much for political campaigns? We spend as much in a presidential election year (all offices) as we spend in chewing gum in a year.

The thesis, if there is one, is that economics is the science of "incentives". Human behavior reacts to incentives. If you study the incentive you can better explain what we do. (I'm doing a terrible job of describing this book and I'm not done yet so I may change my mind...trust me, its an interesting read.)

Due for release May 1. I have an advance copy. I review books for a local bookstore so I get advance copies of nonfiction.

[applegrove]

1. I heard the same thing about legalized abortion in Canada. We

didn't have Rudy & we saw crime rates drop. All the while our cities become more ethnically diverse. So what is up with that?

That being said- I think we can make legalized abortion very low to rare in occurence. I mean they almost have an operation for men (reversable. Also they are working on a pill for men. So get with the clinics for men (teenage boys) - if we want to be real practical!

Anyone who says they are anti-abortion and refuse to teach the young about contraception, etc. IS A LIAR!

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

2. Maybe I've missed the point, but it seems rather chilling

to use legal abortion as a crime-prevention method. I'll have to read the book to get the full perspective, but the idea that in order to prevent kids who maybe unwanted from committing crimes, we terminate them in the womb, doesn't seem conducive to a free society. Smells more like China-style populkation control to me.

Damn. I've stepped in it now, haven't I?

[Spinzonner]

3. Not to mention the latency of the sction vs result

[eallen]

4. But that's NOT why the women choose to abort.

The women involved do not choose to abort because they're more likely to bear a future criminal. They choose to abort because they do not feel ready to be a mother, because their relationship with the father is suspect, because of health or financial difficulty, because they do not want (another?) child, etc. It just so happens -- according to this economist -- that there is a correlation between children born to troubled circumstance and those who later turn to criminal activity.

In short, the result comes not from "China-style population control," but is just a side effect of women living in freedom.

[applegrove]

6. Women living in improved circumstances & less poverty have fewer

children. You invest more in each child the more $$$ you have (from subsistance poor to what would be considered close to working poor in the USA - but is considered middle class everywhere else). And it seems to be the women 'the world over' who make that choice (the men are not the ones who initiate such social change).

[eallen]

7. Having fewer children is not the same as having more abortions.

[applegrove]

9. right. It is not always the same thing. And we all want it to be less.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

8. OK, you have a point.

My personal opposition to abortion notwithstanding, I can understand what you're saying. Again, I'll have to read the book.

[applegrove]

5. Horribly chilling indeed. It is important to note that other methods of

birth control have also been 'more' available too during that same period.

When I first heard it - I didn't sleep that night. To awful by half.

But I think you can use it as an example of the cost of unwanted preganancy to society and focus on the good tools we have to combat the problem.