2022-10-13
1 小时 1 分钟One Yale economist certainly thinks so. But even if he’s right, are economists any better?
Hey there, it's Stephen Dubner.
Before we get to this week's episode, we need your help with a future episode.
Even if you don't know the book or the movie, even if you didn't know there was a book or a movie, you probably know the word moneyball.
That was the title of a book published in 2003 by Michael Lewis.
The subtitle is the Art of Winning an Unfair Game.
It tells the story of a baseball executive, the Oakland A's general manager Billy Bean, who realized he couldn't compete with the big budgets of the bigger teams.
So when it came to assembling his roster, he put his money on smaller bets, smarter bets, statistically sound bets.
That's what Moneyball has come to mean today, even to millions of people who don't know a thing about baseball, moneyball means using data to identify advantages that other people might miss.
Next year will mark the 20th anniversary of Lewis's book, so we are going to interview him for an episode of our free economics Radio Book Club.
And this is your invitation to go ahead and read moneyball or reread it.
And if you have questions you'd like me to ask Michael when we interview him, send them to radioeconomics.com subject line moneyball.
Thanks in advance.
And now on to today's show.
I've got a question for you today, a personal question you may not be so comfortable talking about.
Let me give a little background first.
Years ago, I was writing a book about the psychology of money.
I was going to call it money makes me happy, except when it doesn't.
But I ended up putting that book in a drawer when I met Steve Levitt, an economist at the University of Chicago.
And instead we wrote freakonomics.
That's turned out pretty well.