Says one commenter:
Two of Levitt’s most famous papers are false: i.e. his key findings evaporate once elementary programming errors are corrected. This includes his controversial paper with Donohue that claims that the Roe vs. Wade decision was a cause of the signicant reduction in crime in the U.S. in the 1990s.I guess I just got carried away with the romance of Levitt's story, Dubner's good writing and the whole notion of contrarienism, which is my ego taking over for, um, actual thought. Mine is a classic
BTW, I got this from Sullivan, where you can get some other links. And if you really want to burrow in, take a look at commenters on the first link.
Me? I've got This American Life's big health insurance story to attend to. Anybody got any Prozac?
UPDATE: Okay then. We're screwed.
I think my comment on the first Freakonomics book was something like: "the book on economics you don't need to read this year." And anything Yglesias writes is probably a very close second.
ReplyDeleteOh, another thing: by the logic of TPM commentators quoted a couple of days ago on the Nobel Prize in Economic SCIENCE we probably should dial back our estimation of Paul Krugman's devastating criticism in much of his pronouncements on public policy. "It's NOT a Science, Paul"
ReplyDeleteErm, I distinctly remember you saying that if you could afford it you'd send a copy of Freakonomics to every member of Congress. Was that to confuse them.
ReplyDeleteOr did I dream it?
Krugman on public policy, agreed, politics is not his area of expertise.
Back to "if your mother says she loves you, check it out."