Commentary on the economy, the markets, and business

New column (and video): From macro to freako

My column this week is about Steven Levitt, who together with his co-conspirator Stephen Dubner has a sequel to Freakonomics coming out next Tuesday. It's called Superfreakonomics. We've also put together this lovely video:

In the video, Levitt says the book contains "two things that might make people very, very mad." One of them is a skeptical look into the merits of car seats for children (they've got no complaint with backward-facing infant seats, just the forward-facing ones for older kids), the other is a skeptical look at the current approach toward tackling global warming. He's definitely right about the global warming reaction—just take a look at Joe Romm's lengthy critique (via Krugman).

My own take, partially expressed in the column, is that the global warming segment of the book feels like a strange detour because it's not really freakonomics at all. Levitt is dubious of big-picture predictive models—be they models of the macroeconomy or of the global climate—and that plays some role in the discussion. But it mainly seems like an excuse to write about the fun times he and Dubner had hanging out with Nathan Myhrvold and the gang at Intellectual Ventures, which came about because Myhrvold was a fan of Freakonomics. There's none of Levitt's trademark statistical detective work, just a bit of star-struck oohing and aahing and the assertion that technological innovation is more likely to solve the problem of global warming than privation is. I tend to agree with that assertion, but I am at least a little bit skeptical as to whether Nathan Myhrvold is going to be the source of that innovation.

Beyond that, I liked the book. My buddy Ezra Klein has big problems with the "drunk walking" section—and again, that's a (very brief) part of the book based not on Levitt's economic research but on a bit of not-ultra-sophisticated statistical reasoning inspired, Levitt says, by a throwaway remark by his Chicago colleage Kevin Murphy. But my memory was that the message of that tale clearly wasn't that you should drive home drunk instead, but that you should call a cab. Then I looked it up, on page 3: "So as you leave your friend's party, the decision should be clear: driving is safer than walking. (It would be even safer, obviously, to drink less, or to call a cab.)" Well yeah, I guess taking a cab is their recommendation. But I think I would have phrased that differently.

There are two references in the column that I should attribute more fully here. The "observer" who described Freakonomics as "CSI: Economics" was David Warsh. And the economist who wrote of "economic imperialism" was Edward Lazear, the final chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers in the Bush Administration.

Finally, if you're wondering about the weird-looking blurry rectangle to the left of me near the beginning of the video, it's to obscure Levitt's street address. I just thought it would be kind of creepy to have that in the video.

Update: More on the global warming brouhaha here.

  • Print
  • Comment
Comments (10)
Post a Comment »
  • 1

    given the fact that Romm destroys Levitts "global warming" argument, its grossly irresponsible for you to feature that video (or do any kind of publicity for this book at all). You should either take down this post, or start it out with a disclaimer stating that Levitts's global warming stuff is pure BS.

    • 1.1

      We certainly can't confuse economic and ecologic models, the way Ralph Nader did. Oh, wait, what did we just experience recently, a financial monoculture? The virus wins. ;-)

    • 1.2

      Well, actually the virus loses if it kills its host. Perhaps that's yet another lesson for Wall St....

    • 1.3

      Did you know that Al Gore buy's carbon credits from himself though his UK frim Generation Investment? It was reported in the Wall Street journal awhile back.

    • 1.4

      "Did you know that Al Gore buy's carbon credits from himself though his UK frim Generation Investment?"

      What exactly is that supposed to prove?

  • 2

    The original Superfreakonomic: Rick James.

  • 3

    In the video (at around 2:45) Levitt suggests counteracting the warming effects of CO2 by transporting SO2 to the stratosphere by extending the smokestacks of fossil power plants to the stratosphere with the help of mylar balloons. That would certainly be superfreaking technology.

  • 4

    By now a number of critiques of Superfreakonomics has emerged, perhaps the most forceful of which is:
    http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2009/10/sigh-last-post-on-superfreakonomics-i-promise.html
    I hope Justin updates his post and links to some of them.

  • 5

    [...] Justin Fox reviews “Superfreakonomics.” As does Ezra [...]

  • 6

    [...] The freakonomists vs. the world Posted by Justin Fox Tuesday, October 20, 2009 at 5:09 pm 1 Comment • Trackback (1) • Related Topics: economicsenvironment, agriculture, climate change, global warming, superfreakonomics Stephen Dubner and Nathan Myhrvold have now both written retorts to the many critiques of the chapter on global warming in the new book Superfreakonomics (which is co-authored by Dubner and economist Steven Levitt and stars, in its global warming segments, inventor-dude Myhrvold). They're both mainly responding to the lengthy critique leveled by physicist/climate blogger Joe Romm, which I referenced in my post on Levitt last week. [...]

Add Your Comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.
The Curious Capitalist Daily E-mail

Get e-mail updates from TIME's The Curious Capitalist in your inbox and never miss a day.

Quotes of the Day »

Get & Share
CORINNA LANKFORD, one of the 10 American Baptists who are detained in Haiti on child-trafficking charges