First must state that this reviewer is not an economist, and usually find such books can often be boring. Must admit that this book kept me up far too late one recent weekend reading it through to the end. It was hard to put down.

Another reader/reviewer emailed me, noting that Malcolm Gladwell had said that Steven Levitt “has the most interesting mind in America,” and since I had found Gladwell’s Blink! hard to put down, I might find Freakonomics interesting. This was an understatement.

Then another friend loaned me a copy of the book, so I felt obligated to read it. Now I’ll have to get my own copy, for it’s worth a second read.

As noted above, the cover says it all. Freakonomics is not only humorous in places, it’s fascinating, an out of the ordinary way of looking at economics for those who normally don’t venture into what is often perceived as a boring subject. Like Gladwell’s writing, this reviewer found this book to be a springboard to other ideas.

The authors define economics as “the study of incentives” early in the first chapter, which is not exactly as I remember the conventional definition from college courses. But maybe analyzing how to motivate people to do or not do a particular things is a better way or looking at the reality of economics.

Freakonomics was co-written by the noted journalist Stephen Dubner (Confessions of a Hero-Worshiper), and seems to have drawn as much criticism as it has received praise from reviewers and other commentators. The authors repeatedly state that there’s no consistent theme. Others have noted that it appears to be an assembly of magazine articles and columns, edited and put together in an appealing but not particularly interrelated manner.

But this reader found that it does have a theme, and that theme is that established conventional wisdom is not always right. Things that we perceive to be related just might not be. Maybe there’s no connection at all, and maybe some are simply coincidence.

Liberals and conservatives in our society will find some of Levitt’s thoughts to be controversial. This reader found much of the book to fly in the face of “conventional wisdom,” and found that this is what made it so fascinating. For example, don’t miss Levitt’s discussion regarding abortion, for whether or not you agree with his viewpoint, it is thought provoking.

There are many other thought-provoking concepts that this reader found fascinating, such as the authors’ thoughts on how education and actual knowledge in our public school systems has been replaced by standardized testing preparation. This then leads to the encouragement of cheating just to get the statistics where those in charge of the systems need them to be. To comment further on this would be akin to plot spoiling. But don’t miss Levitt’s comments on the bizarre trends of naming babies, which this reviewer found to be hilarious in their absurdity.

Some have commented that this book is more of a basic text on sociology more than economics, but this reader found that it’s all connected, and makes one want to look further. Levitt is a writer to watch, and he does let the numbers talk for him in an interesting if often offbeat fashion.

Criticisms? Initially had been happy to find this book to be comfortable 256 pages, but after finishing it, wished there had been more. It’s definitely not boring, and that can’t be said about many works related to economics. Might even be a good gift for someone, as almost anyone can read it and frequently have a good laugh.

I thoroughly enjoyed Freakonomics and heartily recommend it: a 5-star offering, without a doubt.

It is an amazing book, it really opens up your view about the world. I suggest it.
Alex from marche property

I’ve been hearing about this book from friends and I finally have it in my clutches. It’s such a good read, but I’m taking my sweet-ass time with it.

Interesting book. I was quite impressed with the way that the authors managed to present economic concepts with examples and language that are very laymen friendly. I was also impressed with the analysis that Steven Levitt had performed into reasons for dropping crime – I generally like stories of people busting conventional theories, and finding new ways to explain things. Anyway – good book. I recommend it.

I’d heard alot about Freakonomics, and it was recommended by people i like and respect. The book proposes alternative ways and suggests hidden connections in economics and effects; seemingly nebulous links between the shadow and the act. As an introduction it is interesting, but the glue that should have kept the sections together is absent. My interest peaked somewhere before the middle and dissipated before the end. The support material was a bit fluffy, and other material (esp. on IQ) was sketchily introduced as solid fact. Stylistically there are many similarities between Freakanomics and the Tipping Point, to Freakonomics’ detriment. I can’t tell if this writing style is something to do with the authors’ association with New Yorker or if there are simply some common ways to introduce themes employed by statisticians. I didn’t love the book, but i am glad it exists as a way to inspire others to pose difficult questions and craft alternative economic viewpoints.

I have shied away from economics all of my life. I am not ashamed to say that I relaized that economics is not all Math and figures after reading this book. Something that had me go “hmmm” was the whole “incentive” idea. The fact that people behave the way they do because if the implicit incentives in behaving that way.

A good book on analyzing human behaviour using data. I should say that I agree with Maggie here that the common theme seemed to me the “Oh, you know what? You are wrong!” thing throughout the book. Especially the excerpts from the NY Times that glorify Levitt.

We all know that person who always has to prove you wrong, like if you say “orange juice is good for you,” they will respond with, “Well, ACTUALLY…” and tell you how maple syrup has the same nutritional value as orange juice and make you feel sort of stupid for thinking otherwise. These people are fun to be around at first because they can spout out little interesting factoids as party tricks, but soon you feel like they just want to prove you wrong no matter what, so you start pressing “ignore” on your phone when you see they’ve called and when you see them at the grocery store you turn down an aisle to hide lest they criticize what’s in your basket. This book is kind of like that person. I was entertained at first but as I read on the fluffiness of the book started to annoy me and I could hear the authors saying, “Nuh-UH” in a taunting voice after list after list of rhetorical questions. The authors brag in the beginning that there is no unifying theme to the book and they are all proud of that, but I think a theme might have provided some substance that the book sort of needs. It’s just so fluffly and none of their conclusions were all that satisfying to me. But you know, it’s alright I guess. I didn’t hate it.

La premisa es muy sencilla, ¿cómo entender la sociedad actual americana? Steven D. Levitt y Stephen J. Dubner analizan montañas de información acerca de casi cualquier aspecto de Estados Unidos. Desde tendencias en profesores tramposos para obtener un bono hasta estadísticas de los nombres más usados en los últimos 40 años. La información en sí resulta interesante, pero el análisis que estos autores le dan es lo que da un giro.

La idea está primeramente en lanzar preguntas al aire acerca de determinado conocimiento convencional que se da por hecho. Por ejemplo, el más respetado y popular deporte de Japón, ¿será susceptible a corrupción? ¿Qué hay de los agentes de bienes raíces y las diferencias cuando venden su propia casa con respecto a la de sus clientes? Analicemos ahora si realmente vender droga es tan redituable como nos lo enseñan las películas y el hip-hop. Un punto que ha sido muy criticado a los autores precisamente es el análisis de las razones por las que en los noventas Estados Unidos sufrió un bajón tremendo en la delincuencia y no era precisa y solamente por más y mejores prácticas en la seguridad pública. Una pregunta que todo padre se hace siempre, ¿cómo ser un padre perfecto? Según estadísticas que se analizan en el libro, es más influyente quienes son los padres para los hijos, que cualquier cosa que hagan (y que es formalmente reconocido) para mejorar el aprovechamiento de los niños como llevarlo al museo o leerle al niño desde temprana edad.

Son muchísimos factores que se ponen en tela de juicio y obviamente desde un punto de vista americano. Donde el análisis de raza también influye fuertemente en el devenir del individuo y su actuación frente a una sociedad. Se antoja hechar un vistazo a otras estadísticas para explicarnos comportamientos tan extraños que ha tenido la sociedad americana a lo largo de los años.

I liked the way different issues had been discussed. They way things were told in this book made me finish it as fast as I could.

And when I had finished, I realized it was an amazing jorney all the way. Do give it a shot and you shall have fun!

I am so happy that Sophie features in the list of top names in the predictions for 2015.

Got an ebook version of the book and this would be the first online book I would read fully and properly. Interesting stats Levitt picks up from his papers and neatly written, though no commont theme through the chapters. Parenting is mentioned big time in this supposed fresh look at economics.

A very interesting book. No math, so it’s accessible to whomever would like to read it. Instead, there’s a whole bunch of discussions of interesting questions asked by a very bright economist. Don’t worry, though, you won’t find the words “feduciary” or “treasury” or any of that kind of things. Instead the authors discuss the link between grade school teachers and sumo wrestlers (and their ethicalness); the relative dangers of guns and swimming pools, and driving and flying; the link between abortions and violent crime; and how parents can affect their children’s futures, from choice of school to choice of name.
The non-economist co-author helps make the book readable – the style is as good as Brian Greene’s or John Allen Paulos, and the questions raised are genuinely interesting – it’s a “don’t sleep until you finish” book.

Very interesting statistics. I was surprised to find my first name in a variety of income situations.

Yet another book I thoroughly enjoyed. I like Levitt’s approach to answering the questions he raises in the book. The style is fun to read. I’d love to read some of his actual papers to get more of the details and statistics that are glossed over in this book.

Levitt and Dubner write about complex things in a simple and punchy style. It’s a well-written explanation of some of the themes that politicians wrongfully interpret for their own agendas.

Compelling read, strangely apologetic though it claims to be unapologetic. Nothing shocking.

A different perspective of looking at things, Sure we have been doing things this way everyday, just that we never cared to analyse it.Analyses mainly about American Society and its impact on economy also discusses about the Black society in whole. Good to read, not so worth if you live elsewhere.

Great to read a book that lives up to its hype. It was a page-turner, one of those “couldn’t go to bed until I finished it” books. The authors use the tools of economics to answer interesting social questions. My favorite parts dealt with cheating teachers and baby names . . . the abortion argument was well worth reading, too.

finished 7/5/2005. Disappointing. More a book on statistics and the social end of thnings than actual economics.

In Freakonomics, authors Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner turn a spotlight on to some touchy areas – abortion, crack dealers, parenting, the KKK, cheating by school teachers, guns in homes. They present a view that if you remove the lens of morality and how things “should be”, many phenomena can be explained through basic economic principles. As a business professional with graduate degrees in both economics and business, I couldn’t agree more. Yet the book is in a word, lightweight. A little over 200 hundred pages and presented in large, easy-to-read print, Freakonomics can be read in a couple of hours. And if you understand anything about economics that you could pick up in a college survey class, you won’t be that surprised by their analysis. I can only think that the reason this book has been on the NYT best seller list is because most people don’t understand the basic tenets of economics.



The author’s assertion that a main contributor to the falling crime rates across the country in the mid 90s was due to unwanted babies not being born twenty years earlier will rankle many, especially conservative Catholics and right-to-lifers. This is not a new theory, nor was Levitt the first person to think of it when his paper on the subject was published in 2001. However, the popularity of Freakonomics may be was gets this theory more out into the mainstream and collective consciousness of this country. By the way, although Levitt presents his theory on crime and abortion almost as if it is “the truth”, it is not a fact, but a theory, albeit one with compelling evidence and arguments.



All in all I was amused and intrigued by much of what is presented in this book but think that it could and should have been twice as long given the cost of the book.