Most helpful customer reviews
|
|
12 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Fun to Read, Oct 27 2009
Much like Freakonomics, Superfreakonomics is an entertaining book that covers a wide variety of unrelated topics in a fun way. But in contrast with Freakonomics, it is less reliant on econometric analysis and more on anecdotal evidence. As a result, its conclusions should be taken with a grain of salt.
For example, their finding that it is safer to drive than walk while drunk depends on several assumptions that may not hold. One such assumption is that the level of inebriation is on average the same for both drunk walkers and drunk drivers whereas, as they point out themselves earlier in the section, most people believe it is safer to walk when drunk, indicating that those who walk while drunk are probably more inebriated than those who drive while drunk. But to put things in context, that was just a small example and is only a very minor part of the book.
Sadly, many critics and reviewers are basing their entire opinion of the book on the last chapter concerning global warming. Let me just point out that it is not true that they are claiming that global warming is not a problem. Yes, they do mention some old global cooling theories from the 70's. But put this in the context of this book - a random collection of fun facts - and you can see why such theories were mentioned.
But that misses the main point of the chapter. In fact, the purpose of the chapter is to find a way to cool the globe, but using geoengineering, as opposed to restricting emissions of Carbon Dioxide. They propose an idea sponsored by Intellectual Ventures, a company whose business is to accumulate patents in a wide range of fields. The plan basically entails the injection of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, which would reflect sunlight and possibly cool the Earth. The authors propose this as a much cheaper and possibly effective solution for global warming.
You can see why environmentalists may be annoyed by this book: it gives their political opponents some ammunition in a critical time when they are trying to pass environmental regulation. It is thus critical, for them, to destroy the credibility of the book and its authors. Perhaps this is an understandable position, but the attacks on this chapter of the book are highly unwarranted in any other context given that it is merely proposing new ideas, and there's nothing wrong with that. For all we know, more research could prove that such schemes are effective.
Buy this book if you enjoy reading a collection of fun, often counter-intuitive, random "facts" about controversial issues. I would give it 5 stars for entertainment value, but I only gave it 4 stars out of 5 because the high level of econometric analysis that could be found in Freakonomics is virtually non-existent here, making the sequel sloppy and less rigorous.
|
|
|
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Not as good as the first..., Nov 4 2009
This book continues on the theme of the first book. There are no real revelations in it over and above what they had already done, though it is interested to see further examples.
As mentioned in another review, the overwhelming distraction is the discussion on global warming. While they don't actually explicity deny it, doubt is so thoroughly implied that one wonders their motives. The interviews with IV have obviously been biased in the direction of scepticism (I would love to read/see the entire thing). Are they just pandering to the global warming denialists? Are they fence sitting to sell books? It is dubious enough to cast doubt on the other, potentially worthy case descriptions.
There are better books out there: Malcolm Gladwell's followups are of a more consistent quality than this one is.
|
|
|
4 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Microeconomic Speculations Intended to Challenge and Amuse, Nov 7 2009
"But he who did his neighbor wrong pushed him away, saying, 'Who made you a ruler and a judge over us?'" -- Acts 7:27
One of the earliest lessons of microeconomics has been credited to Pareto, based on his observation that 20 percent of the people have 80 percent of the wealth. Since then, we've learned that many other things are distributed in similarly lopsided fashion. If we focus on where there is little opportunity, we get little done. If we focus instead where there is great opportunity, the results may well be virtually unlimited. SuperFreakonomics, like Freakonomics before it, uses Pareto's perspective in a variety of areas where you probably don't normally think that unusual solutions at low cost might hold. The results can be enlightening and amusing, at the same time.
Here's a brief summary of the book:
Chapter 1: Economic inequality of women as exemplified by salary information with a lot of documentation of price elasticity and inelasticity in sex-worker employment.
Chapter 2: Using unusual patterns to locate terrorist intent on suicidal attacks. A shortened life expectation shifts behavior in ways that can be observed.
Chapter 3: People respond to incentives rather than to altruism. Measurements are challenged by newer measurements that take more factors into account.
Chapter 4: Seemingly possible inexpensive ways to solve difficult problems. Filled with more amusing speculation than substance.
Chapter 5: Curtailing carbon dioxide emissions won't cure global warming. The authors look at speculative ideas for changing the heat-trapping qualities of the atmosphere and oceans.
Epilogue: Monkeys can be trained to act like people with money.
If that mix of material seems a little random, the underlying theme is that microeconomic analysis can bring new insights, even where you wouldn't expect it to. Methinks the authors doth protest a little too much.
I could have done with a lot less information about prostitution. I don't really need to understand price elasticity in that area. This material felt a little like pandering to sell more books.
I enjoyed the terrorist chapter. If the book had been more like that, it would have been a lot more interesting.
The studies of motives seemed better suited to a book on social science research than to a popular book.
In the inexpensive solutions, I thought that the authors were reaching to be entertaining more than they were trying to inform.
In the global warming section, the points about carbon dioxide compared to water vapor and methane are accurate and well presented. But the authors went off the deep end in pursuing alternatives. These suggestions are more in the realm of speculation than proven alternatives.
Will the book harm you? Probably not.
Will the book give you a great big insight that will reward you for reading it? Maybe not.
Will the book give you lots to talk with other people? Sure.
I hope the authors will attempt to be more solution oriented in future books and less driven by a desire to be "entertaining."
|
|
|
Most recent customer reviews
|
by Malcolm Gladwell
by Steven D. Levitt
by Malcolm Gladwell
by Chuck Klosterman
