Freakonomics Review The main idea of ​​this chapter is that the study of economics is the study of incentives. We find a differentiation between economic incentives, social incentives and moral incentives. Incentives are amusingly described as "means of getting people to do more good things or fewer bad things," and in this chapter we find some examples: public school teachers in Chicago, sumo wrestling in Japan, caring for in Israel and Paul Feldman's bagel business - how incentives drive people and most of the time conventional wisdom turns out to be "wrong" when incentives are in place. I definitely agree with this, as I read this I can think of several examples that happen in everyday life in Mexico, and this is a clever explanation for them: the corruption of the cops. It's not that cops are bad people or that they have no morals, it's that the monetary incentive is strong enough that they prefer to "cheat" and profit more from corruption than they would earn on their monthly salary. In this discussion it is explained that incentives sometimes lead to cheating, because "something worth having is something worth cheating for." I think that the incentives placed in everyday life – those that we can control, say, in our business – should be established wisely, in order... middle of the paper... different, children's names are predictors of their success/ failure because of his connection to his parents and the cycle that names follow from low to high socioeconomic classes. All these trends emerging from economic analysis become interesting especially when they are supported by statistical data – but they are also examined through cause/effect such as the growing demand: is black culture a mere reflection of the economic gap between blacks and whites or has it caused the gap between them? From my perspective these results are surprising and hard to believe, but they make sense. While I think the author is being radical about this, regarding some posts he made on his website's blog about the middle name Wayne characterizing criminals. I guess we can find many strange coincidences, but it is important to determine the causes, whether they are consistent.