The Economist’s Guide to Parenting: Economist Kids Photo Gallery

For our latest podcast, “The Economist’s Guide to Parenting” (you can download/subscribe at iTunes, get the RSS feed, listen live via the media player, or read a transcript here), we asked for parenting advice from a most unlikely group of people: economists. The roster of guests includes our very own Steve Levitt, Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers; and also features economist parents Bruce SacerdoteMelissa Kearney, Valerie Ramey, and Bryan Caplan.

As a bit of extra fun, we decided to make a photo gallery out of the cute family pictures they sent us. Take a look at these proud economist parents!

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.



View All Comments »
  1. Suleiman says:

    Beautiful families, all around!

    Steve Levitt, until I read the caption, I assumed you had four younger children and a teenage daughter.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
  2. Adrienne S says:

    Interesting – 3 out of your 6 contributors have daughters named “Sophia” (or some variation – i.e. Sophie) – Kearney, Sacerdote & Levitt. All these girls are under the age of 11 –

    One of the families who do not have a “Sophia” – does have a daughter (the Ramey family) – but she is considerably older than the oldest Sophia.

    In your original “Freakconomics” book – “Sophie/a” was listed as a projected “Most Common Name for 2015″ – 2015 being the time all of these girls will be in school.

    Zofia was listed as #16 in the “Twenty White Girl Names That Best Signify High Education Parents”

    Food for thought!

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
    • Sofia Sacerdote says:

      I just wanted to clarify that my name is actually spelled with an F. In 1999, the year I was born my name was ranked #195.

      Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
  3. joeff says:

    Two Sophies and a Sophia–an aberration?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
  4. dave gershner says:

    Parenting is a good parallel as to how people would handle the money the government would give them in Paul Ryan’s approach to doing away with medicare.

    The poor, uneducated, undereducated and those with bad luck would do a terrible job with Ryan’s approach to helping the aged through their costly health problems, just as they don’t do a very good job now at parenting, e.g., truancy, school dropouts, high teen age drug use, etc.

    With bad parenting society is stuck with the bill in more police, more prisons, more lawlessness and weaker communities.

    With Ryan’s health care financing we would have larger and more expensive charity hospitals for the states to pay for, a less healthy society, and the shame put on us by ourselves and others in advanced countries at how we treat the elderly in the U. S.

    Ryan might not care today, but most people’s children and grandchildren would find their own assets sorely depleted by paying for the health costs previously paid for by Medicare.

    Congressman Ryan supposedly works out and has a great body, but don’t count on his help as your children’s money flies out to pay for parents/grandparents expensive health costs. You aren’t likely to allow them to lie in the streets waiting for a gurney in the charity medical centers.

    More proof of the sub par intelligence of leading republicans and their lack of compassion for the future health of the country and the deleterious effects they will have on your children’s wealth.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
  5. Greg D says:

    While I agree with the ideas expressed in the podcast that excessive parent-managed childhood activities probably do not contribute to either the child’s happiness or success, I wonder how to square that notion with the fact that some children do take to certain activities and like them. The world’s greatest pianists were probably dragged to piano lessons as children, eventually found that they enjoyed music, and make careers out of something they enjoy. If the dragging never took place because parents were worried about over-programming their children, where would the great musicians, dancers, etc. come from?

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  6. Ken Lee says:

    Kids are much better looking that I suspected. OK, they are adorable and worth educating & spoiling until the budget busts.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  7. Jacquelyn says:

    Loved it – convinced me not to get married…

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
  8. BillV says:

    The broadcast makes it sound like economists are the only ones who have examined parenting and the nature/nurture issue, including twin studies. Are economists really better equipped than the psychologists and geneticists who have produced reams of research on these subjects? Do they deserve even a nod?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0