1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Lera25 [3.4K]
3 years ago
11

Read the following excerpt from Levitt and Dubner’s Freakonomics.

English
2 answers:
Paha777 [63]3 years ago
6 0

The correct answer is C) studying his individual experiences and arriving at a broad generalization. Paul Feldman quit his job as economist and started selling bagels at his former company and other workplaces based in an honor system. He left bagels and doughnuts in boxes and a tray for the money, he would later pick up the leftovers and the money. While he identified factors that increased or decreased the rate of people stealing, he came to the conclusion that most of the people, around 87% are honest and won't steal. Key factors for stealing included big offices, bad weather, holidays and unhappy employees. Key factors for being honest included smaller offices, good weather and a close connection to the person selling the food.

At the end his conclusion was that good people will be good no matter the circumstances and bad people will steal no matter how good the company they work for. Paul F has hope in mankind as his 20 year career selling bagels has demonstrated most people are good.

balu736 [363]3 years ago
4 0

Studying his individual experiences and arriving at a broad generalization.

Further Explanation:

The title of the book is suggestive of the unconventional nature of the contents of the book. Levitt has included within the book a series of articles that do not follow traditional economic laws or rules. He has explained the most random subjects by the application of economic theory. At the end of the book, the authors try to arrive at a general conclusion, after a thorough examination of individual experiences. The conclusion is that economics is the study of incentives, which are general motivators, which spur and reward reactions held to provide an extremely desire outcome. The book’s chapters explain some very significant day to situations along with historical events on an economic framework, for example, it explores the subject of cheating as applied to teachers and sumo-wrestlers, from information control from the context of Ku Klux Klan, to issues from legalizing abortion, the economics of drug dealing, etc.

The book had several reactions from critics, some of whom hailed it as a refreshing take on economics, to others who have focused more on its sociological framework, rather than being a work of economics. The book undoubtedly digs out unconventional statistics, which somewhat feels unproven, and has hence been called ‘dubious’ by several economists. Some of the economists have felt that the book’s contents are disconnected from economics and have a very strong sociological undertone, going as far as to designate the work as ‘amateur sociology’. Several of their arguments have been contradicted, for example, their take on the reduction of crime after legalized abortion has been widely criticized.

Learn more:

1. Which of the following represents one of congress's electoral powers

<u>brainly.com/question/1907649 </u>

2. While the lead architect of the new st. peter's project, what was Michelangelo's design contribution to the project?

<u>brainly.com/question/3595653 </u>

Answer Details:

Grade: High School

Chapter: Freakonomics

Subject: English

Keywords:

Economics, sociology, unconventional topics, economic framework, perspectives, legalization, reduction of crime, criticism.

You might be interested in
He cried loudly standing in the corridor. The given verb is ----------
lana66690 [7]

Answer:

standing

bjkjjjllhjfdhjakfbv

8 0
3 years ago
Mutiple choice question need help Now!!!! 15pts
sweet-ann [11.9K]

The answer is (2) insert a comma after me

6 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How long does it take your brain to notice a potential hazard
AlekseyPX

Answer: 390 to 600 milliseconds

Explanation: MIT researchers have found an answer in a new study that shows humans need about 390 to 600 milliseconds to detect and react to road hazards, given only a single glance at the road, with younger drivers detecting hazards nearly twice as fast as older drivers.

6 0
2 years ago
Read 2 more answers
PART B: Which statement from the text best supports the answer to PART A? How you see yourself
tester [92]
Answer:
What do you mean? And is there any picture?
8 0
2 years ago
Read the paragraph from the "Ellis Island Oral History Project" excerpt.
Law Incorporation [45]

Answer: The answer is (A) The interviews represent a wide range of viewpoints.

  • Explanation: I took the test Hope this helps!!!!!

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • Which is a disadvantage of speaking? A. It takes time to organize your thoughts and words. B. The words and ideas are short-live
    15·2 answers
  • 30 points
    7·2 answers
  • Read the following text:
    8·1 answer
  • HELP 30 POINTS URGENT!!!!! NEED HELP ASAP
    13·1 answer
  • What is an interpretation?
    10·2 answers
  • In "Ozymandias," the words on the pedestal are contrasted with the
    8·1 answer
  • this isn’t a question but please don’t just put a letter please write out the actual answer. thank you!!
    13·1 answer
  • Exam
    15·1 answer
  • 4.How would you describe life in this city in the year 2053? Quote a specific example of Bradbury's use of language that enabled
    15·1 answer
  • WHAT IS Fernando full name in fuller house
    6·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!