Customer Reviews

Freedomnomics: Why the Free Market Works and Other Half-Baked Theories Don't

5 star:		(71)
4 star:		(13)
3 star:		(9)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(17)

 

 

Personally, I liked Freakonomics. By pointing out "the hidden side of everything," it forces the reader to think about how things are connected in ways the average non-economist might not imagine. However, that's all the book is really good for. There's not a lot of serious economic analysis in there, only interesting ideas thrown about at almost at random. Thus, reading Freakonomics for the conclusions makes about as much sense as reading Playboy for the articles. For this reason, a book responding to Freakonomics shouldn't have been necessary. Given the buzz created by Freakonomics, though, it probably was, and Lott is as good an economist as any to do that.



For example, Levitt and Dubner wrote in Freakonomics that realtors keep their homes on the market a little longer than their customers do, and also make a bit more profit upon selling them. From this, Levitt and Dubner jumped to the conclusion that this meant realtors are systematically scamming their customers. Lott rightly countered with a much simpler and more straightforward explanation: every realtor follows his own sage advice, but not every realtor's customer does. Lott's conclusions regarding the interplay between crime and abortion are a bit more questionable. True, the fact that the U.S. and Canada experienced a similar drop in crime at the same time in the early 1990s, while Canada's version of Roe came a decade too late to fit neatly with Levitt and Dubner's theory, does appear at first blush to be problematic for their theory. However, at second blush it's not clear how how problematic that factor is, given that the very few Canadians live more than a couple hundred miles from the U.S. border, meaning that nearly all could have easily availed themselves of Roe in the interim. Lott is on shakier ground still when he argues that legalized abortion caused an increase in crime, while citing data equally consistent with the view that some other factor, e.g., the sexual revolution, caused both the increase in uncommitted sex (with or without contraception) and the push for legalized abortion. Given the relatively short history between Griswold and Roe, in which Americans enjoyed a "constitutional" right to contraception but not abortion, it's not clear we will ever know which factor caused the other. That said, Lott does appear to have made as strong of a case for the view that abortion causes crime as Levitt did for the view that it prevents it, thereby neutralizing the abortion-as-crime-control argument with which Levitt himself stops short of fully endorsing.



Lott has plenty of books filled with tables, linear regressions, and all that other geeky stuff few of us could understand if we tried. Freedomnomics is not such a book. Rather, it reads as exactly what it purports to be: a conservative reply to Freakonomics. Like Freakonomics, it is written to be accessible to the layman, not to provide the reader with a mountain of data supporting every conclusion. For this reason, I'd urge readers to read both books in much the same way: use both to help you recognize issues you may otherwise not have noticed, but take both books' conclusions on these issues with an appropriately sized grain of salt. And I'm saying this as one who agrees with many of Levitt and Dubner's conclusions, and almost all of Lott's.

Excellent book showing the power of free markets and the harm that manifests when governments interfere in markets. Many economists claim that free markets work great in theory but there are many types of market failures that require government intervention. Lott points out how markets themselves can overcome these so called market failures and how government attempts to correct these failures often makes the situation much worse.

Lott takes on very politically incorrect topics that the mainstream media would never touch such as how affirmative action influences police effectiveness and how giving women the right to vote has influenced the size of the government.

The book is very readable and is clearly intended for a general audience. I would strongly recommend it to people who enjoy the writings of columnists such as Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell.

Even though I have no background in economics I picked up Dr. John Lott's Freedomnomics the other day and was somewhat surprised to find it as fascinating a read as it was. It's designed to be a direct response to the wildly successful Freakonomics, and the text here was definitely written with laymen in mind. In other words, the statistics he presents are more educational than they are overwhelming. As far as the politics goes, Dr. Lott is obviously a man of the right but the book is not a partisan affair. It is a sincere attempt to demystify the innerworkings of economics. There's no plugging of any candidates or of a party here. It's kind of sad to acknowledge but recognizing the inherent inefficiency of government, along with the way in which private individuals spend their earnings more efficiently, is often a partisan issue in this country but it really shouldn't be.

Dr. Lott emphasizes the liberty and justice inherent to capitalism, and debunks numerous arguments about the limitations of the free market along the way. The bottom line here is that capitalism is what has allowed America to become as well-off as we are. In how many other countries is the overeating of poor people a major concern? As far as what positions struck me as being the strongest, I'd have to say that his link between women's suffrage and the swelling of government was ironclad. Further, in but two pages, he gave one of the best explanations that I've heard for why college faculties are ideologically skewed. I also have to admit that the Myth of Double Giving was completely unknown to me before opening this book. I always just accepted the idea that corporations covered their bets by giving to both political parties simultaneously. Upon reading this I discovered that the press reporting of these figures is completely inaccurate. The company net for donations is a total of what private donators, who happen to work for a particular corporation, give. They do not come from the company itself. Nowhere was Dr. Lott stronger than in his examination of the fashionable theory that increased abortion rates decrease crime. He found the opposite to be true and was most persuasive--in fact, the whole book is most persuasive. The whole country would be better off if half of our young people were lucky enough to read the chapter, "Government as Nirvana?"

Do you think economics is boring? Do you struggle to understand economic principles? If you answered yes to either question, then check out Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner. These two economists apply their knowledge to such a wide variety of subjects that it is hard to keep up.

For example, did you ever wonder why drug dealers live with their moms or what schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers have in common? Levitt and Dubner address these and other equally unusual topics. By applying well-known, basic economic principles to unique circumstances, the authors help readers better appreciate the complex world of money matters. You'll have so much fun reading this book that you won't even realize you're learning something about economics.

Considering the success of Freakonomics (it reached the number two spot on the New York Times nonfiction bestseller list), it is not surprising that Freedomnomics: Why the Free Market Works and Other Half-Baked Theories Don't by John R. Lott, Jr. was published a short time later. Freedomnomics, as the front cover tells us, is a rebuttal to Freakonomics and more. Although not as popular or as well written, Freedomnomics scored points with me because I am a firm believer in capitalism and the free market society. I also found some of Lott's economic research to be intriguing. For instance, in the chapter on women's suffrage and the growth of government, Lott tracks changes in government spending both before and after women finally obtained the right to vote.

Freedomnomics does not rehash all of Levitt and Dubner's material, but it does attempt a point-counterpoint on several topics, including abortion and crime in the United States. Read both books and make your own decision about who is right and who is wrong.

This book doesn't settle for presenting the theory of why the free market works, it goes into detail and digs into history to prove it. One of the most refreshing sections is where Lott refutes the nauseating theory of the Left that the drop in the crime rate in the 90's happened because a lot of the potential criminals had been aborted. The Left really is amazing; they don't want the death penalty for someone who has actually committed several brutal murders, but they're okay with it for an innocent person who is statistically likely to someday commit murder, rape or burglary. Lott painstakingly demonstrates that the real cause was the increase of the death penalty, higher arrest rates, and the larger number of citizens carrying concealed weapons.

He also tells us some things we didn't know about the history of public education. It started in the 1820s in an attempt to educate Catholic children as Protestants, because legislators believed that Catholics were more prone to commit crimes! It's a disappointment to me that he doesn't also mention that education became compulsory because of pressure from labor unions, who wanted children forced out of the job market so that their members could have them instead.

One of the most intriguing sections, which is bound to also be the most controversial, is where he demonstrates that women's suffrage always leads to expanded government. He presents the evidence and leaves the reader to face the obvious conclusion. Very few people have the courage to point this out today, and it is badly needed.

Reading Lott's book, Freedomnomics, made me wish out loud, "why couldn't I have had a professor like John Lott?" Lott's presentation of facts and concepts are easy to grasp, and his use of current, solid, and very intriguing data, examples and quotes from political leaders, business notables and everyday news items make his chapters enjoyable. This book leads the reader along at a fast clip on a tour of the global economy and the free market principles that invisibly govern it. Lott's book logically lines up major themes that cover the entire spectrum of policy debate over our social and economic present and future. It then proceeds to take on one controversial issue after another, without fear. Lott simply defines the boundaries of the argument, gives salient and well documented facts, uses economic reasoning to compare policy options and concludes with observations that are easy to follow and free of economic jargon.

If this is your first foray into contemporary economics, you'll have fun. If you are looking for something that might draw you deeper into the explanation of how the free market works in today's economy, and how its principles have shown to solve social and political problems that other systems have failed to address adequately, this is a great dive into the pool. If you're well-versed enough to already like the work of notables such as Thomas Sowell, you'll love Freedomnomics as well.

I served as John Lott's research assistant at the American Enterprise Institute, and he would often pose interesting questions and ideas to us about the way the world worked, such as why dinners are more expensive than lunches at restaurants or why licensing requirements result in weaker real-estate agents and teachers. In this book, Lott takes several of the interesting questions he has studied over his career and offers clear and compelling reasons to believe his arguments. While the book will appeal to free market economists, you certainly don't need to have economic training to enjoy the book.

His main argument in the book is that incentives matter and that free markets work. The profit motive coupled with reputation results in goods and services which are for the most part reliable and meet consumer demands. Some of the main questions Lott probes in the book are why crime rates fell dramatically in the 1990s (he debunks the theory that legalized abortion was responsible), whether new cars drop dramatically in value when driven off the lot (they don't), and why government has grown substantially since World War I. I highly recommend this book for people looking for thoughtful explanations of why many of the phenomena we observe in society are the way they are.

I'm a professor of economics, and I'm very familiar with the work of John Lott. I bought this book because I enjoy reading arm-chair econ books ... just can't get enough econ! Normally I'm disappointed because the examples and applications are usually stolen and reworked material that's been around for years. Not so with Lott's book.

The great thing about the book is not just the refreshing topics, but Lott's gifted approach to understanding them. Take, for example, the growth of government. Many bright minds have worked to explain why did governments grow so fast after WWI? Dozens of theories have been spun, none very successful. Not only does Lott have an ingenious answer (women's suffrage), but he also has an ingenious test and exploits the fact that some states voluntarily granted the right, while other states had it forced on them. It is Lott's ability to come up with clever and convincing tests and evidence that separates him from others.

I don't like the title of the book, and I don't like the sub-line "a rebuttal to Freakonomics." The book is much more than this, and I'm sure the publisher had more to do with the cover than the author. If the cover turns you off, I'd open the book and read a few pages.

The book is well written and accessible to anyone interested in social behavior. A very good read and highly recommended.

As a professor of economics, I am aware of how difficult it is to communicate the "simple" principles of economics. The approach that seems to work best involves the use of lots of examples, especially ones that engage and challenge students. John Lott's new book is filled with such examples. While it can be recommended to anyone with an interest in how the economy works (since it is written in an engagingly nontechnical style), it should be especially valuable to teachers and students of economics. It would work well with any microeconomics or applied microeconomics class. I have used part of the book in my public finance class, and I believe teachers of labor economics and industrial organization would also find much of interest to them and their students. Highly recommended.

John Lott has written an excellent book. I like to think of the market as the doughnut and market failure as the hole. John Lott demonstrates convincingly that the hole is actually much smaller than most people think.

Take the problem of asymmetrical information, where the person selling you a product or service knows a lot more about it than you do, for example, doctors, real estate agents, and automobile mechanics. In fact almost every product you purchase comes from someone who knows more about it than you do. Does that mean you are suckered at ever turn? No, as Lott points out, sellers are very worried about their reputations. If it were revealed that a doctor was recommending unnecessary surgery or that a garage was ripping off its customers, the doctor and the mechanic would lose all or most of their future business as customers stayed away. The total value of the future lost business would be many times the gain of a few more operations or repairs. As Lott demonstrates, there is a very strong incentive to be honest.

Lott covers many very interesting topics. For example, he explains why academics and public school teachers tend to be politically liberal, why government is growing, and why crime fell in the 1990's. His positions are backed up with his own and others' research published in respected academic journals, so his opinions have in a sense been peer reviewed.

If I were still teaching principles of economics, I would definitely use this book for discussion. It could even be used in conjunction with Levitt and Dubner's Freakonomics because the differences between the books are guaranteed to generate excellent discussion. (I think Lott is right on most counts.) If I had to choose one, I would choose Freedomnomics because, like Lott, I believe that the doughnut is much bigger and much more important than the hole.