Mike and Aubrey introduce Mike's new show, If Books Could Kill! Find it on Apple, Spotify, Stitcher, Google and wherever else you get your podcasts. Also, don't forget to pre-order Aubrey's new book! Support us: Subscribe on PatreonDonate on PayPalGet Maintenance Phase shirts, stickers and moreSupport the show
The host discusses how she became fascinated by bad ideas and how the best way to dissect them is through airport books. She talks to her friend who hosts the “5 to 4” podcast about why the Supreme Court sucks.
In this conversation, podcast hosts dissect the ideas in the book Freakonomics and criticize its narrative on economics and social issues. They talk about their new project "Trickle-Up Economics" as a way to reframe the American narrative.
The Chicago School economists in the 80s believed that social problems could be solved through economic principles, which has become one of the dominant paradigms for American problem-solving despite its fallacies.
The speaker expresses their frustration with a book full of cute anecdotes and try-hard transitions, claiming that only 10% of its content is significant. They also reveal that the book was a rushed project, a fact that shocked them and others after publication.
This podcast episode discusses the bizarre nature of tax laws related to child deductions, including a historical instance where the IRS requested children's social security numbers, and statistics on child drowning incidents.
This podcast discusses the behavior patterns observed in people paying for bagels, and the practices of match-fixing. While some interesting insights were uncovered, it remains unclear how much can be learned from these patterns.
A study conducted in California showed that white parents are more likely to give their babies names that are at least four times more common among whites, while black parents tend to choose names that are associated with their culture. Despite this, society tends to label "black-sounding" names negatively and perpetuate stereotypes.
The episode discusses how people often misconstrue quantitative data and fall for urban legends while exploring the universe and interesting data points.
The rise and drop of crimes in the 1960s and onwards was affected by a number of factors including the increase of incarcerations, although policymakers often conflated which policies were effective versus which were morally right.
Crime statistics are often unreliable as they are heavily influenced by factors such as corruption scandals or police brutality incidents which lead to decreased reporting of crimes. Additionally, a reduction in crime reports is seen as a win for the police, while an increase in crime reports is also counted as a success, making it difficult to accurately gauge crime rates.
The data correlating states with legal abortions and lower crime rates is flawed as the states which legalized abortion earlier had higher rates of abortion due to women traveling for the procedure.
Studies show that there is no clear correlation between abortion legalization and crime rates. In fact, some studies suggest that crime rates have dropped in areas where abortion is not legal.
Discussed are some theories for the decrease in crime rates such as air conditioning, changes in drug markets, lead poisoning, increased incarceration rates, and more. There seems to be no single explanation for this phenomenon.
The idea that lead exposure is linked to crime has been widely circulated, but many criminologists and sociologists argue that it is an oversimplification that ignores other socio-economic factors.
The hosts discuss the difficulty of navigating research and data in today's society, with particular mention of the popular economics book "Freakonomics".