The persona portrayed by Dubner and Levitt in their novel Freakonomics is that of an unconventional Economist. Levitt’s introduction includes the quote "Morality, it could be argued, represents the way that people would like the world to work, whereas economics represents how it actually does work." (Levitt 13). This quote details an important distinction that characterizes the rest of Levitt's analysis. As an economist, he studies how the world actually functions, which tends to include deviations from what may be considered the moral.
In this essay I will compare and contrast Marx and Weber’s theories on social change and the rise of modern capitalism. Firstly I will provide a brief outline of Marx’s theories relating to social change and capitalism. I will then briefly outline Weber’s theories on social change and the rise of modern capitalism. Finally I will give my own critique of the theories outlining which one I prefer and the reasons for my choice. Although they actually share some similarities, Weber’s analysis of class, change, capitalism and history differ radically from the views by Marx.
The present essay is in the reference of the article “The science of shopping” written by Malcolm Gladwell, the famous writer from New Yorker magazine. His appeal to this article was the study of retail anthropology which was acknowledged by Paco Underhill, a psychologist that study environments. Retail stores has an obvious intention- convince and attract a customer as much as they could purchase. If we start to study as a whole there is so much to know about shopping behaviors and the knowledge we can extract upon how the thinking of people’s get affected by an environment. The only reason of Paco Underhill’s success is that he observe those details which usually we do not notice and avoid while conceder to analyze buying and selling.
Without a doubt McClelland is all about the middle class and has intent on watching it rise back to power. He entailed many facts that supported the idea that the middle class shouldn’t be lost within this transition of jobs and shouldn’t be oppressed by the government’s attempt to control inflation through insufficient means. RIP, the Middle Class: 1946-2013 certainly got the point across, as it was mainly the author’s ideology and little of the various viewpoints that are associated with the subject matter. He could have covered more of the other side’s argument as well to further improve his own
words: freak and economics. Freak, by definition, means abnormality or oddity and most people might familiarize economics solely with finance or commerce. However, Levitt and Dubner break this common misconception and reveal how to world actually works, as opposed to distinguishing everything with morality and how everyone thinks the world should work. Book Report The first major concept that Freakonomics explores is incentives and how our economy revolves around it. We explore our incentives during our everyday lives in school, work, and even relationships.
FOCUS STUDENT 1 a) Focus Student 1 completed the assessment well, he achieved some of the use of academic language throughout his graphic organizer. Focus Student 1 was able to successfully compare and contrast the arguments/rational of Hoovers response to the Great Depression to Roosevelts response. For example, Focus Student 1 was able to show me that Hoover believed that the government should not get involved with helping its citizens, where FDR thought the government should get involved. As well, he was able to provide me with an acceptable summary. However, I would have like to have seen more details in his summary.
His point is that there can be something for the inequality between the rich and poor. There are a few things the economy needs to keep in mind and that is how we distribute taxes and the poor, how we invest schools, the money we use to build roads, and transit systems. Inequality may be seen as impossible to overcome, but I agree with Leonhardt says “Rising inequality is a trend, but it is one that we have helped and create and we can still change (547). In making this comment, Leonhardt urges us to have a broader perspective and become more open-minded that we can in fact, be able to make a change, comparing it as a
But, in comparison to Marx, his approach is not only covering economic facts, but several other perspectives, such as social and cultural aspects. Drawing from Marx’s concept of capital, he developed other types of capital, cultural and social capital (Wacquant, 2007, 268), in order to analyse class division from different perspectives. According to Bourdieu, capital is transmitted from older to younger generation within the family. Economic capital, representing financial and material resources, transmitted from father to son, enable the younger generation to build an education, in other cases even to start a business, as he is stating in a famous documentary about him (Sociology is a martial art, 2002). Cultural capital, on the other hand, also transmitted within the family, is covering all those cultural aspects, such as language skills, traditions, cultural knowledge as myths, literature, poetry and art.
In terms of managing change and crisis, Starbucks CEO, Howard Schultz navigates challenging situations with grace and ease. He even states that those he turned to in times of need and questioning seemed to only want his input rather than share their own strategies. Based on the way he is portrayed in the Harvard Business Review article, Starbucks Crisis: “We Had to Own the Mistakes” by Adi Ignatius, regardless of whether Schultz did so deliberately, he demonstrated very textbook change/crisis management strategies and he did them well. He started by taking personal ownership of the hardship and removing culpability from other top executives. He used inclusive language like, I, we, us, and our.
All in all, both Smith and Marx share some similar qualities in their perspective towards the rise of the Industrial Revolution and more specifically capitalism and production. Next, when comparing Smith and Marx, it is evident that there are more differences than there are similarities in regards to their philosophies towards the Industrial Revolution and changing economy. To begin, Adam Smith also known as the Father of Capitalism and founder of Western Economics is best recognized as the writer of The Wealth of Nations (Smith, 1863). Through his works, it is clear that he approved of the capitalist system seeing it as a system that helped bring the Industrial Revolution. He saw private ownership as a necessity for development, all of which his ideas were based around “Laissez Faire”, “Invisible Hand” and “Free Market” economics (Smith, 1863).