What Are Your Favorite Freakonomics.com Blog Posts of All Time?

We are starting to put together an anthology of posts from this blog, which we began in 2005, just before the publication of Freakonomics. It is a lot of fun going through the archives — more than 8,000 posts! — but also a bit overwhelming.

Are you willing to help? Whether you are a longtime reader or a new one, please tell us (in the comments section below) any blog posts that you think should be included (or that shouldn’t be). Maybe it was a post you loved … or hated … or something that changed the way you think … or gave you a good idea. Maybe it was simply something that was memorable for reasons you don’t understand.

Don’t feel that you need to troll through the archives as I’m doing, although you are certainly welcome to!

Many thanks.

TAGS: ,

Leave A Comment

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

 

COMMENTS: 20

View All Comments »
  1. Kelly says:

    The post about online dating. I’m a well-educated & successful single woman. In the online dating world I just wasn’t getting as many messages as friends. After your post (where I learned that education beyond college & high earnings relative to men can work against women online dating) I removed my occupation & salary… voila! The messages were rolling in!

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
  2. Andy says:

    Why, this post (asking about best posts) of course.

    Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
  3. vimspot says:

    Wolfers’ series on income and happiness pierces conventional wisdom with counter-intuitive and fact-based analysis. In other words, it’s the epitome of what a good freakonomics post is.

    http://freakonomics.com/2008/04/16/the-economics-of-happiness-part-1-reassessing-the-easterlin-paradox/

    Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
  4. James H says:

    Commenting on a comment. Reminds me that context matters. It still gives me a chuckle, 7 years later.
    http://freakonomics.com/2007/10/15/commenting-on-a-comment/

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  5. uthor says:

    I’ve cited this post more than any others.
    http://freakonomics.com/2011/11/14/the-inefficiency-of-local-food/

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
  6. Lili Torok says:

    Hi, most of your podcasts are very good, I especially loved the ones on online dating, and on whether an unconditional cash transfer would improve lives. The one on efficient exercise is one of the less fortunate ones.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  7. Indian says:

    I liked the podcast on guns in America where the conclusion was that nothing will change despite all the mass shootings. That was spot on and nothing has changed.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
  8. Eli says:

    You should NOT include the post “Is Learning a Foreign Language Really Worth It?”

    First, the title of your post should be “Is Learning a Foreign Language (In America) Really Worth It?” which Dubner, Saiz and Caplan all distinguish in the article.

    I read Albert Saiz’s paper (not carefully) and only two percent of individuals in their data sample speak Chinese, and it was not even clarified if this was Mandarin or a dialect such as Cantonese. Saiz had some data that suggests different second languages have different economic returners, but here was no data on the correlation between speaking Chinese and income, perhaps because of the lack of data.

    Your article rightfully points out that the school system is inefficient at teaching a second language, but that does not indicate that learning a second language is a waste of time, but rather schools need to change their methods, or language learning should not be emphasized in a normal curriculum, which was more or less pointed out by Caplan.

    Also, there was no study presented in the article exploring whether or not becoming fluent (not just studying a bit) a second language enriched people’s personal life.

    Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0