Chunk two (chapter 3 and 4) of Frekonomics by Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner asks why drug dealers still live with their mom's and where have all the criminals gone. Like previously, Levitt and Dubner encounter these problems with an economists perspective of analyzing the problems many solutions and sources at a fast-paced tone with the use of moderately sophisticated language. To solve why drug dealers still live with their moms Levitt and Dubner offer a detailed glimpse into the economics of a drug-dealing street gang; through the eyes of Sudhir Venkatesh, a sociologist. When Venkatesh remarkabley receives a copy of all the financial records kept by the gang he shares it with Levitt. With extensive analysis of the data, Levitt debunks the common perspective that all crack dealers are wealthy and live lavish lives. He refutes this common misconception, by informing the general public that only the few top of the food chain make money while the actual 'foot soldiers'(drug dealers) make less than half of the minimum wage. Levitt states the like the college football player who lifts weights to better his chances of playing in the NFL, people who become crack-dealers have the same ambition to climb the latter to more pay. In chapter four Levitt concludes that the 1973 legalization of abortion is the source of the rapid decline in the crime rate. Recognizing the volatility of this argument, Levitt and Dubner approach the problem from numerous perspectives, methodically proving that their is no correlation between each of the solutions to the surprising crime drop. For instance, in detailed analysis, they demonstrate that factors such as improved policing strategies, stricter gun control, new prisons, an aging population, and a number of other possible explanations simply do not relate to the dramatic violent crime drop because they either don't occur chronologically or with disproving crime data. Hence forward, Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner show how "..conventional wisdom is often found to be a web of fabrication, self interest,and convenience.." and how some solutions should not be overlooked because the abstract answer may be the right answer after sorting out the facts from the fiction.
Tone: not too formal, straight-forward, persuasive
Rhetorical devices:
- Allusion: when describing how cocaine impacted the American population harsher than the Jim Crow laws, to amplify the severity of the problem.
- Statistics: making Levitt's argument more credible and believable. For instance, when he included data of how the crime rate decreased when abortions increased.
- Logical appeal: when disproving all popular solutions with counter arguments and credible data to prove that their(Levitt and Dubner) solution is correct.
Questions:
- Do you think the legalization of abortion was the source of the dramatic drop in crime?.
- Why does present culture depict drug-dealing as a well-respected and wealthy career in the media, when there is a one in four chance of death, and the pay is half of minimum wage?
4 comments:
funny how now the second chunk not due
Dubnar and Levitt offer answers to questions that aren't necessarily considered serious. Although, they make good observations. One of your questions about abortion reducing crime; i never considered that possible solution to a decrease in crime. Heh, I didn't know that at a larger scale, crime had begun dissipate. (well, I would argue that it is not always true locally or internationally). And yes, I totally agree with you that they use allusions on their behalf, to strengthen their credibility. It helps us, the audience, feel assured about their reasoning and comparisons. It's pretty amusing how economics can be applied to our daily lives. Good analysis.
It is apparent that the legalization of abortion has stimulated or helped to faciliate a drop in crime. So yes, I also agree with the point that preventing the births of potential delinquents has hindered crime rates.
In contemporary media, drug dealers are portrayed as wealthy individuals with a surplus of money, many women, etc. However, why anyone in their right mind would place drug dealers on a pedestool is perplexing. Drug dealers are the scum of the Earth the harbingers of death, and deprived individuals who have a contorted sense of right and wrong. If the notion that drug dealers are looked up to is true, our society has degraded into a decadent state deserving of pity and much repair.
Dude, your writing style has changed. A lot better than before. nice dude. But...(try to stay off dictionary.com)
ROCK ON DUDE.
To the first question, it is certainly well founded that abortion played a role in the decrease of crime. The mainstream justifications are only excuses for the government to expand its power--remember, those with power have for too long been the conservatives, who oppose abortion, and thus would never give much credence to it.
As to the latter question, the hip hop culture has certainly given drug dealing undo respect.
Post a Comment