Freakonomics

Freakonomics:

A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything is a 2005 non-fiction book by University of Chicago economist Steven Levitt and New York Times journalist Stephen J. Dubner. The book has been described as melding pop culture with economics. By late 2009, it had sold over 4 million copies worldwide.

Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? What do schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers have in common? Why do drug dealers still live with their moms? How much do parents really matter? How did the legalization of abortion affect the rate of violent crime?

These may not sound like typical questions for an economist to ask. But Steven D. Levitt is not a typical economist. He is a much-heralded scholar who studies the riddles of everyday life—from cheating and crime to sports and child-rearing—and whose conclusions turn the conventional wisdom on its head.

Freakonomics is a ground-breaking collaboration between Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, an award-winning author and journalist. They usually begin with a mountain of data and a simple, unasked question. Some of these questions concern life-and-death issues; others have an admittedly freakish quality. Thus the new field of study contained in this book: Freakonomics.

Through forceful storytelling and wry insight, Levitt and Dubner show that economics is, at root, the study of incentives—how people get what they want, or need, especially when other people want or need the same thing. In Freakonomics, they explore the hidden side of … well, everything.

Freakonomics establishes this unconventional premise: If morality represents how we would like the world to work, then economics represents how it actually does work. But Freakonomics can provide more than that. It will literally redefine the way we view the modern world.

One classic example of Freakonomics: In the 1990’s violent crime in America started increasing, experts predicted that the crime rate would increase drastically in the near future but for everybody’s surprise the crime rate in America started decreasing. The experts now stated that this is because of better policing, better administration and good governance. But Freakonomics proved this wrong; 20 years ago(1970) in America abortion became legalised hence the children who were supposed to be born and grown in adverse environment who latter would have grown up and become criminals were now not born at all. Hence the crime rate in America started decreasing.

This is what Freakonomics is by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner.

Freakonomics challenges the conventional wisdom and proves that it is often wrong it asks fresh interesting questions, most economics even wouldn’t have taught of.

Other example of the authors' use of economic theory involves demonstrating the existence of cheating among sumo wrestlers. In a sumo tournament, all wrestlers in the top division compete in 15 matches and face demotion if they do not win at least eight of them. The sumo community is very close-knit, and the wrestlers at the top levels tend to know each other well. The authors looked at the final match, and considered the case of a wrestler with seven wins, seven losses, and one fight to go, fighting against an 8-6 wrestler. Statistically, the 7-7 wrestler should have a slightly below even chance, since the 8-6 wrestler is slightly better. However, the 7-7 wrestler actually wins around 80% of the time. Levitt uses this statistic and other data gleaned from sumo wrestling matches, along with the effect that allegations of corruption have on match results, to conclude that those who already have 8 wins collude with those who are 7-7 and let them win, since they have already secured their position for the following tournament. Despite round condemnation of the claims by the Japan Sumo Association following the book's publication in 2005, the 2011 Grand tournament in Tokyo was cancelled for the first time since 1946 because of allegations of match fixing.

Well, my motive is to find out the Indian examples of Freakonomy, here is a small example of typical Indian Freakonomy.

An IAS topper becomes topper in the Exam not because he had attended a particular Coaching institute but he  maight have topped the exam due to his determination and hard work, he would have become topper even if he hadn't attended any of the Coaching institutes.

I know this is just a vague example but i wanted to tell you this is how we can extract the concept and build it justifiable taught and prove it.  

will be back after finding out some valid taught on Indian Freakonomy.