Economic theory and irrational behavior - mcadams.posc.mu.edu.

Gary Becker’s research on economics has also been his life’s work and garnered him the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1992 for “having extended the domain of the microeconomic Analysis to a wide range of human behavior and interactions, including non-market behavior. ” (Federal, p. 1).

Becker’s entire life has been spent taking the typical economic approach and extending it to a wider range of social issues. In addition to sheer monetary issues, Becker goes further and shows that individuals, contrary to widely held belief do not operate solely under financial gain and, in fact can show great acts of altruism as well.

It has been said that Becker’s analysis should perhaps be known as the theory of rational choice, or purposeful behavior rather than simply as the straight economic approach generally seen. (The Prize p.

or any similar topic only for you

1). Becker himself notes that economic analysis can be applied to many issues in our daily social lives, other than the ones we traditionally believe to be strictly “economic. ” He further states that “the horizons of economics need to be expanded. Economists can talk not only about the demand for cars, but also about matters such as the family, discrimination, and religion, and about prejudice, guilt and love.

” (Religion p. 1). He very staunchly states that economic imperialism is not the same thing at all as crude materialism and that the idea that the total of a person’s value lies in their material worth has more in common with Marxist analysis than his own. (Religion p. 1). Robert Pollack, a self-stated critic of Becker’s concedes that he is really more of a follower of Becker’s than a critic, and that in all reality Becker put the family on the economic professions research agenda. (Pollack p. 5). The economics of the family is a creation of Gary Becker, and exhibits incredible significance in our lives today. B.

Objectives/Hypotheses/Position Becker calls the form of interdependent preferences within the family “altruism. ” These preferences are introduced by supposing that one spouse is egoistic, while the other is altruistic, or cares both about his or her own consumption as well as the spouse’s utility. Pollack argues that rather than altruistic, the word should be known as “deferential,” as it is much more descriptive, denoting that, for instance the husband defers to his wife’s preferences regarding her consumption pattern. (Pollack pg. 12). Regardless of the terminology used, we can take Pollack’s model for explanation.

Family members often have non-deferential preferences wherein each spouse cares about each other’s consumption habits either instead of or in addition to caring about their own. For the laymen, Pollack lays out Becker’s theory even simpler: A wife may have non-deferential preferences in that she wants her husband to spend more time jogging “because it’s good for him,” and less time watching TV. In other words, non-deferential preferences tend to mean that each spouse prefers a different consumption patter for the other spouse, than the other spouse would choose for him/herself. (Pollack p. 14).

Becker would state that the altruist, or deferential partner does not give anymore weight to his own well-being or self-interests than he gives to any other family member. Becker typically allows that the head of the household is regarded as an altruistic agent of the interests of all family members. (Pollack p. 14). Martha Nussbaum, a philosopher, finds this theory to be full of holes. Because the typical head of the household is male, Nussbaum feels that Becker’s theory becomes flawed as “males are often neglectful of the interests of females, whether wives or children, and makes decisions inimical to those interests.

” (Pollack p. 14). Whether or not you agree with Nussbaum that the typical male head of household is far from altruistic, or deferential, I think we can all agree that in theory there is generally one altruistic or deferential spouse in a relationship, along with the other who is the non-deferential spouse, or is more concerned with their own financial issues than of those of their spouse. Becker’s deferential preferences as related to parents and children would state that parents were not only concerned with their children’s utilities, but with their consumption patterns as well.

In other words, while parents might be willing to pay for college, or perhaps a down payment on their children’s first house, they will be much less inclined to pay for a Hummer, or a trip to Europe. (Pollack p. 16). So the deferential model has parents willing to fund the “necessities” of life, such as education or a roof over their children’s heads, but are much less likely to want to pay for the frills. C. Methodology Becker’s household production model theorizes that households “combine both time and market goods to produce more basic commodities that directly enter their utility functions.

” (Pollack p. 16). This is, of course, based on the assumed absence of joint production in the family as well as the assumed observability and measurability of commodities. Becker denotes “commodity shadow prices” in his household production model, which is the ratio at which a household can transform one commodity into another. All time and market goods that produce more basic commodities means treating all household functions as commodities. Therefore, time spent cooking, time spent cleaning, time spent helping children with homework all become commodities.

Please note, that Becker defines commodities as anything that is observable or measurable, therefore in his model, time spent watching a pay with the children, sleeping, or listening to music is measurable, while stating these same things differently, such as “music appreciation,” makes them unable to be measured or observed. So, the same activity, stated differently might or might not be a commodity. (Pollack p. 19). Becker’s altruistic model in the context of family consisted of a “brood of egoistic but rational “kids” and one deferential or altruistic parent.

In his “Rotten Kid Theorem,” Becker notes that “Each beneficiary, no matter how selfish, maximizes the family income of his benefactor and thereby internalizes all effects of his actions on other beneficiaries. ” (Pollack p. 21). Becker frequently uses the wife in the family model as the Rotten Kid, and Pollack’s example is that an altruist (or his selfish beneficiary) would eat with his fingers only when its value to him exceeds the value of the disgust suffered by another family member, or the altruist would read in bed late at night only when its value to him far exceeds the loss of sleep suffered by his spouse.

(Pollack p. 21). D. Innovating Aspects of Paper Becker basically looked upon the family, or the household as a miniature factory which produced services for the members of the household, “with an input of time and purchased consumer goods, the latter being regarded as intermediate inputs in the production process taking place in the household. ” (The Prize p. 1). In this particular context, then, a wage rise can lead to less time-consuming production of services within the household.

In other words, the father’s increase in pay might well enable the mother to hire a maid to help with the household chores, thereby freeing up more of her own time for the children or for leisure activities. In a really innovative step, Becker also applied his economic family theories to the area of crime and punishment, making the assumption that except for a certain number of true psychopaths, “individuals who behave criminally react in predictable ways to different stimuli in the form of benefits and the costs of criminal activities.

” (The Prize p. 2). This theory would then offer fairly solid predictions about which groups of citizens could reasonably be expected to commit which types of crime. Studies on this subject have shown that an increase in the probability of being convicted at all is more a deterrent to the would-be criminal than the expectation of a certain level of harshness of punishment. (The Prize, pg. 2). D. Brief Critical Literature Survey Another famous book of Gary Becker’s is entitled “The Economics of

Discrimination. ” The theory of this book is that discrimination carries certain costs. For example, let’s assume that a certain businessman doesn’t like hiring women, or blacks, or any specific group, for that matter. In our present day highly competitive marketplace this businessman must then bear the cost of his particular discrimination. If he hires a high-wage white worker as opposed to an equally productive but lower-wage female worker, he has then foregone profits that could accrue to his firm.

Although he may still decide to discriminate based on his strong feelings about one group or another, essentially the stronger his prejudices, the higher the cost. Although in some situations these costs might be hidden, and even though a competitive market will never completely eliminate discrimination, the market will, in itself, tend to reduce discrimination purely because the company that discriminates must pay the monetary costs associated with discrimination. (Economic p. 3).

Becker also discusses Richard Epstein’s book, “Forbidden Grounds,” calling it a very “thoughtful book, which raises good questions. ” (Economic p. 3). Epstein stresses the difficulties in implementing civil rights legislation, stressing the huge gap between the promise and the practice; Becker agrees with Epstein’s conclusion that there should be no civil rights legislation. (Economic p. 4). II. Analysis A. Hypotheses/Model Becker believes his model of household production puts economics into a simpler form that can be more easily understood by the general public.

In fact, the American people as a whole tend to be frightened by economics, to the point, Becker says, that when you mention you are an economist, the typical response is that people say they took an economics class in college and either hated it or were terrible at it, or both. Becker believes that we should relax over the whole issue of economics, and that economists should attempt to express economic concepts in simple language, and detail the solving of economics in a straightforward, simple way. (Federal, p. 6).

Becker continues by saying that many intellectuals and economists use big words and obscure language when they are writing about economics. “Sometimes it is a way of disguising that they are not saying a heck of a lot. Of course, some propositions are tougher to express. ” (Federal p. 6). The challenge to a writer of economics, or any subject considered by the average person to be difficult, is to give a reasonably intelligent person a feel for the basics, and let their own intellect take it from that point. B. Analytical Discussion of Topic/Model In an interview with Gary Becker, he was asked if it was a true story that the initial

Inspiration for his work on the economics of crime was found while searching for a parking spot, and he agrees, “True story. ” As he tells the story, he was coming down to Columbus University for an oral exam. He was to ask students a half-hour’s worth of questions on price theory. Becker was living in the suburbs at the time and drove to Columbia. He was running a bit late—never a good thing in New York City with parking spaces at such a premium. Because in those days Columbia had no designated parking for their faculty members, the choice was to either park illegally or go into a parking lot.

Realizing how late he was, Becker pondered on the two choices, mentally calculating his chances of getting caught if he parked illegally versus parking a couple of blocks away which would entail a longer walk, as well as costing money. As Becker walked to the exam—a walk that took about ten minutes—he suddenly realized that if he was thinking about his chances of getting caught while parked illegally, that in all likelihood, the police were thinking about the same thing. They must, if they were rational human beings, be thinking about the likelihood of catching someone who was illegally parked.

When Becker reached his student’s oral exam, the first question he presented was the one he had been pondering, and while he remembers the student didn’t do to well with an answer, Becker realized what an interesting topic it was, and started working seriously on it from that point out. Becker states that “I set it up so that society was trying to minimize the expected loss from criminals, taking account of the damage done by the crime, cost of policing, cost of taking somebody to trial, cost of punishment, how much deterrence there would be if criminals expected greater punishment or lesser punishment and so on.

” (Federal p. 2). In the end, Becker was grateful to his parking problem, as it led him to one of his most “famous” theories of crime and economics. C. Theoretical Analysis Gary Becker was a great believer that family law would be a good area in which to do more law and economics work. He notes that family law is often looked down on in law school, not being a field that “top” people should consider going into, yet the family is such an important institution in society, that family law should certainly garner more respect from the legal industry.

Families have been ever-changing, particularly in the last few decades, and now there are more and more areas of family law such as divorce, fertility, child care, homosexual marriages, homosexual parenting, marriage contracts, custody provision…the list goes on and on. Therefore Becker finds family law an area of great interest, ready to have more law students making it their specialty. Becker feels that family law is clearly one area that can have much more done with it using the tools of laws and economics. (Federal p. 3). D. Experts’ Insights and Findings

Pollack finds Becker’s earlier talked about altruistic model as an “ultimatum game. ” Pollack’s example is that the first player, or the proposer, offers a division of a fixed sum of money between himself and the second player. The second player, or the responder, is informed of the proposed division, and must then choose between two alternatives which are: • She can accept the proposed division, in which case both players receive the proposed payoffs, or • She can reject the proposed division, in which case both players receive exactly nothing.

Therefore, Pollack reasons, the ultimatum game is a one-shot non-cooperative game in which the “proposer moves first and confronts the potential recipient with a take it or leave it offer. Commitment is essential to ultimatum games—if the responder rejects the offer, the game ends; the proposer cannot improve his offer. ” (Pollack p. 24). E. Regressions/Correlation Analysis/data/tables To relate the above ultimatum game to Becker’s altruistic model, consider the game in which the proposer and the responder divide a fixed sum of money. Further consider that the proposer has egoistic tendencies.

Therefore, the proposer offers a division in which he gets the entire sum, and the responder accepts, because she can do no better. If, on the other hand the proposer cares about the responder’s utility, then the proposer is going to offer a division that benefits the responder above himself. F. Findings/Arguments/Evidence The take it or leave it family ultimatum game provides “a model in which all Becker’s claims about efficiency, distribution, and family demand functions hold. The altruist attains his most preferred feasible point, subject to the constraint that others receive enough to remain in the family. ” (Pollack p. 25).

G. Statistical Data/Tables “Empirical work on pooling began with articles by Duncan Thomas and T. Paul Schultz. ” (Pollack p. 33). Thomas showed that kids do better in terms of mortality and morbidity when their mothers control a larger fraction of the family resources. Beck’s alternative theory to this assumption is the “better mothers” story, or the fact that mothers with more energy and ability are more likely to control a larger fraction of family nonlabor resources, and thus to have kids who do better. Thomas and Shultz, however, do not observe energy or ability. III. Policy Findings and Conclusions A. Basic Findings/Summary

According to Pollack, Becker’s economic approach to the family is often believed to imply that certain types of government policies cannot and do not affect allocation within families because they “will be fully neutralized by individuals’ responses. ” (Pollack, p. 39). Both Becker’s altruist model and Rotten Kid Theorem imply that which parent receives the child benefit must be irrelevant, however Pollack feels that the conclusion that parents will neutralize the child benefit “depends on the assumption that family collective choice is determined by the altruist model, and that preferences exhibit transferable utility.

” (Pollack p. 40). B. Policy Recommendations from your findings The role of technology and its place in facilitating the ability of human capital is both critical and important in today’s world. Becker felt that modern economies depend on modern technology, and you can’t have one without the other. Additionally, these various technologies are generally produced by people who have lots of human capital. Without that human capital there would not be the opportunity to build and make effective use of technology.

Lastly, according to Becker, these new technologies are going to significantly impact the acquiring of this capital. People are beginning to use the various forms of technology to work at home, or earn degrees at home, thereby reducing the cost of gathering many people under one roof. (Manville, p. 3). The possibilities of the new technologies, along with the specific economics of these same technologies offer incredible opportunities for our future. C. Limitations of your study The limitations of the study on Gary Becker’s contributions to Family Economics

exist only in the capacity to devote enough information to each subject in the required amount of space. D. Suggestions for Future Research Reading Gary Becker’s “Human Capital and Poverty Alleviation” would be my number one suggestion for future research. Becker believes that the main purpose of economics is to both understand and help alleviate poverty and this issue seems to be one that requires further investigation and study. IV. References: A. Scholarly Books/Journal Articles Pollak, Robert A. 2002. Gary Becker’s Contributions to Family and Household Economics.

National Bureau of Economic Research. Cambridge, MA 02138, October 2002. B. WWW. References Becker, Gary S. December 16, 1994. Human Capital and Poverty Alleviation. http://www. worldbank. org/html/extdr/hnp/hddflash/workp/wp_00052. (Accessed June 17, 2006). Becker Honored with Phoenix Prize. April 23, 2001. Economist Wins Prize for Contributions to Social Sciences. http://www. chibus. com/media/storage/paper408/news/2001/04/23/GsbNe ws/Becker. Honor (Accessed June 13, 2006). Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. June, 2002. Interview with Gary Becker. http://minneapolisfed.

org/pubs/region/02-06/becker. cfm (Accessed June 15, 2006). Manville, Brook. 1994. Talking Human Capital with Professor Gary S. Becker, Nobel Laureate. http://www. linezine. com/7. 1/interviews/gbbmthc. htm (Accessed June 12, 2006). Religion and Liberty. March and April 1993. Economic Imperialism. http://www. acton. org/publicat/randl/print_interview. php? id=76 (Accessed June 13, 2006). The Prize in Economic Sciences 1992. The Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel 1992. http://www. nobelprize. org/economics/laureates/1992/presentation-speech

(Accessed June 12, 2006). V. Appendix A. Mathematical/statistical elaboration There was little mathematical elaboration in the sources I used, although Pollack used a specific mathematical equation to explain Becker’s household production model. B. Data Data used consisted of both Gary Becker’s writings and interviews as well as the views of other professionals regarding his conclusions. C. Results The results of this paper are to explore Becker’s theories of economics and present the results in a format that is hopefully more easily read by the laymen.

Gary Stanley Becker (/ˈbɛkər/; December 2, 1930 – May 3, 2014)^[1] was an American economist and empiricist. He was a professor of economics and sociology at the University of Chicago. Described as 'the most important social scientist in the past 50 years' by The New York Times,^[2] Becker was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 1992 and received the United States Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2007.^[3] A 2011 survey of economics professors named Becker their favorite living economist over the age of 60, followed by Ken Arrow and Robert Solow.^[4]

Becker was one of the first economists to branch into what were traditionally considered topics that belonged to sociology, including racial discrimination, crime, family organization, and drug addiction (see rational addiction). He was known for arguing that many different types of human behavior can be seen as rational and utility maximizing. His approach included altruistic behavior of human behavior by defining individuals' utility appropriately. He was also among the foremost exponents of the study of human capital. Becker was also credited with the 'rotten kid theorem.'

Biography[edit]

Born to a Jewish family^[5] in Pottsville, Pennsylvania, Becker earned a B.A. at Princeton University in 1951, and a Ph.D. at the University of Chicago in 1955 with a thesis entitled The Economics of Racial Discrimination.^[6] At Chicago, Becker was influenced by Milton Friedman, whom Becker called 'by far the greatest living teacher I have ever had'.^[7] Before turning 30, he began to teach at Columbia University in 1957, and in 1970 returned to the University of Chicago. In 1965 he was elected as a Fellow of the American Statistical Association.^[8] Becker was a founding partner of TGG Group, a business and philanthropy consulting company. Becker won the John Bates Clark Medal in 1967. He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1972,^[9] and was a member (and for a time the President) of the Mont Pelerin Society.^[10] Becker also received the National Medal of Science in 2000.^[11]

A political conservative,^[12] he wrote a monthly column for Business Week from 1985 to 2004, alternating with liberal Princeton economist Alan Blinder. In 1996 Becker was a senior adviser to Republican Presidential Candidate Robert Dole.^[13] In December 2004, Becker started a joint weblog with Judge Richard Posner entitled The Becker-Posner Blog.'The Becker-Posner Blog'. uchicagolaw. University of Chicago Law School.

Becker's first wife was Doria Slote, from 1954 until her death in 1970.^[14][13] The marriage produced two daughters, Catherine Becker and Judy Becker.^[13] About ten years later, in 1980^[14] Becker married Guity Nashat, a historian of the Middle East whose research interests overlapped his own.^[15] Becker had two stepsons, Cyrus Claffey and Michael Claffey, from his second marriage.^[14][13]

Becker died in Chicago, Illinois, aged 83, on May 3, 2014,^[16][17] after complications from surgery at Northwestern Memorial Hospital.^[18]

In 2014 he was honored in a three-day conference organized at the University of Chicago.^[19]

Nobel Memorial Prize[edit]

Becker received the Nobel Prize in 1992 'for having extended the domain of microeconomic analysis to a wide range of human behavior and interaction, including nonmarket behavior'.^[20]

Discrimination[edit]

Becker wrote his dissertation in 1955 at the University of Chicago, which examined the economics of discrimination. At the time, economics was strictly the study of market behavior and market economies. Becker challenged the past era of economics by bringing a new investigation of social matters to economics. Becker's contribution to discrimination was unpopular with people arguing that his theory was not economics. He used the international trade model for his analysis on The Economics of Discrimination. In 1957, the publication of his thesis was the study of social issues and the market. He believed both groups can potentially be harmed. The discriminating firm can limit its own productivity and profitability.

Becker often included a variable of taste for discrimination in explaining behavior. He believes that people often mentally increase the cost of a transaction if it is with a minority against which they discriminate. His theory held that competition decreases discrimination.^[21] If firms were able to specialize in employing mainly minorities and offer a better product or service, such a firm could bypass discrepancy in wages between equally productive blacks and whites or equally productive females and males. His research found that when minorities are a very small percentage the cost of discrimination mainly falls on the minorities. However, when minorities represent a larger percentage of society, the cost of discrimination falls on both the minorities and the majority. He also pioneered research on the impact of self-fulfilling prophecies of teachers and employers on minorities. Such attitudes often lead to less investment in productive skills and education of minorities.^{[citation needed]}

Becker recognized that people (employers, customers, and employees) sometimes do not want to work with minorities because they have preference against the disadvantaged groups. He goes on to say that discrimination increases the cost of the firm because in discriminating against certain workers, the employer would have to pay more so that work can proceed without them. If the employer employs the minority, low wages can be provided, but more people can be employed, and productivity can be increased.^[22]

Politics[edit]

Becker is also famous for his economic analysis of democracy. He asked what determines the extent to which one interest group can exploit another. He considered this exploitation to be deadweight loss, meaning a failure to reach efficiency. As Palda (2013) explains

According to Becker, political equilibrium exists even in non-democratic societies. It arises out of a simple calculation that predatory interest groups and their taxpaying victims make: what return on my investment can I get by lobbying government? Becker's insight is that the gains to predators are linear, but the losses to prey are exponential, thereby stiffening the resistance of victims as the aggression of predators plods on without similarly increased vigor. Think of a gang of robbers taking half the crop from peasants. They then return for the second half. The gain to the gang of the second half cut is the same as in their first extortion. Yet for peasants to lose the last half of their crops means possible starvation and the certain loss of seed corn. They can be expected to resist violently, as they did in the Hollywood movie The Magnificent Seven and in the Japanese movie on which it was based, The Seven Samurai.^[23]

Becker's insight was to recognize that deadweight losses put a brake on predation. He took the well-known insight that deadweight losses are proportional to the square of the tax, and used it to argue that a linear increase in takings by a predatory interest group will provoke a non-linear increase in the deadweight losses its victim suffers. These rapidly increasing losses will prod victims to invest equivalent sums in resisting attempts on their wealth. The advance of predators, fueled by linear incentives slows before the stiffening resistance of prey outraged by non-linear damages.^[24]

These contributions to politics by Becker have come to be known as 'Chicago political economy' of which Becker is considered one of the founding fathers.^[25]

Crime and punishment[edit]

Jurist Richard Posner has stressed the enormous influence of Becker's work 'has turned out to be a fount of economic writing on crime and its control.'^[26][27]

Becker's interest in criminology arose when he was rushed for time one day. He had to weigh the cost and benefits of legally parking in an inconvenient garage versus in an illegal but convenient spot. After roughly calculating the probability of getting caught and potential punishment, Becker rationally opted for the crime. Becker surmised that other criminals make such rational decisions believing that their judgment is based upon scarce commodity or risk seeking. However, such a premise went against conventional thought that crime was a result of mental illness and social oppression.

While Becker acknowledged that many people operate under a high moral and ethical constraint, criminals rationally see that the benefits of their crime outweigh the cost such as the probability of apprehension, conviction, and punishment, and their current set of opportunities. From the public policy perspective, since the cost of increasing the fine is trivial in comparison to the cost of increasing surveillance, one can conclude that the best policy is to maximize the fine and minimize surveillance. However, this conclusion has limits, not the least of which include ethical considerations.^[28]

One of the main differences between this theory and Jeremy Bentham's rational choice theory, which had been abandoned in criminology, is that if Bentham considered it possible to annihilate crime completely (through the panopticon), Becker's theory acknowledged that a society could not eradicate crime beneath a certain level. For example, if 25% of a supermarket's products were stolen, it would be very easy to reduce this rate to 15%, quite easy to reduce it until 5%, difficult to reduce it under 3%, and nearly impossible to reduce it to 0% (a feat that would be so costly to the supermarket that it would outweigh the benefit, if it is even possible).

Human capital[edit]

Becker's 1964 book titled Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education has gone through three editions since its original publication. Becker's research was fundamental in arguing for the expansion of human capital. When his research was first introduced it was considered very controversial as some considered it debasing. However, he was able to convince many that individuals make choices of investing in human capital based on rational benefits and cost that include a return on investment as well as a cultural aspect.

His research included the impact of positive and negative habits such as punctuality and alcoholism on human capital. He explored the different rates of return for different people and the resulting macroeconomic implications. He also distinguished between general to specific education and their influence on job-lock and promotions.^[29]

Families[edit]

Becker has done research on the family, including analyses of marriage, divorce, fertility, and social security. He first analyzed fertility starting in 1960.^[30]

In the 1960s he and Jacob Mincer developed the New Home Economics, of which Becker's theory of allocation of time is a centerpiece.^[31] Becker argued that such decisions are made in a marginal-cost and marginal-benefit framework and that marriage markets affect allocation into couples and individual well-being. His research examined the impact of higher real wages in increasing the value of time and therefore the cost of home production such as childrearing. As women increase investment in human capital and enter the workforce, the opportunity cost of childcare rises. Additionally, the increased rate of return to education raises the desire to provide children with formal and costly education. Coupled together, the impact is to lower fertility rates. His theory of marriage was published in 1973 and 1974. Among its many insights are that (1) sex ratios (the ratio of men to women in marriage markets) are positively related with wives' relative access to consumption in marriages^[32] and (2) men with higher incomes are more likely to be polygamous. He published a paper on divorce in 1977, with his students Robert T. Michael and Elizabeth Landes, hypothesizing that divorces are more likely when there are unexpected changes in income.^[33][34] Many of these insights on fertility, marriage, and divorce were included in Becker's A Treatise on the Family, first published in 1981 by Harvard University Press.^[35]

In April 2013, in response to the lack of women in top positions in the United States, Becker told Wall Street Journal reporter David Wessel, 'A lot of barriers [to women and blacks] have been broken down. That's all for the good. It's much less clear what we see today is the result of such artificial barriers. Going home to take care of the kids when the man doesn't: Is that a waste of a woman's time? There's no evidence that it is.' This view was then criticized by economist Charles Jones, who stated, 'Productivity could be 9% to 15% higher, potentially, if all [remaining] barriers were eliminated.'^[36]

Economic Theory, Journal

Organ markets[edit]

A 2007 article by Gary Becker and Julio Elias entitled 'Introducing Incentives in the market for Live and Cadaveric Organ Donations'^[37] posited that a free market could help solve the problem of a scarcity in organ transplants. Their economic modeling was able to estimate the price tag for human kidneys ($15,000) and human livers ($32,000). It is argued by critics that this particular market would exploit the underprivileged donors from the developing world.^[38]

Selected publications[edit]

• Becker, Gary (1993) [1964]. Human capital: a theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education (3rd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. ISBN9780226041209.
• Becker, Gary S. (September 1965). 'A theory of the allocation of time'. The Economic Journal. 75 (299): 493–517. doi:10.2307/2228949. JSTOR2228949.

Reprinted asBecker, Gary S. (1995), 'A theory of the allocation of time', in Humphries, Jane (ed.), Gender and economics, Aldershot, England Brookfield, Vermont, USA: Edward Elgar, pp. 113–37, ISBN9781852788438.

• Becker, Gary S. (1968), 'Discrimination, economic', in Sills, David L. (ed.), International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, Vol. 4 Cumu to Elas, New York, New York: Macmillan, pp. 208–10, OCLC256379373.

Reprinted asBecker, Gary S. (1995), 'Discrimination, economic', in Humphries, Jane (ed.), Gender and economics, Aldershot, England Brookfield, Vermont, USA: Edward Elgar, pp. 385–87, ISBN9781852788438.

• Becker, Gary S. (March–April 1968). 'Crime and punishment: an economic approach'. Journal of Political Economy. 76 (2): 169–217. doi:10.1086/259394. JSTOR1830482.
• Becker, Gary S. (1969), 'An economic analysis of fertility', in National Bureau of Economic Research (ed.), Demographic and economic change in developed countries, a conference of the universities, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 209–40, ISBN9780870143021.Pdf.
• Becker, Gary S. (1971). The economics of discrimination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN9780226041049.Details.
• Becker, Gary S. (1971) [1957]. The economics of discrimination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN9780226041155.
• Becker, Gary S.; Lewis, H. Gregg (March–April 1973). 'On the interaction between the quantity and quality of children'. Journal of Political Economy. 81 (2): s279–s288. doi:10.1086/260166. JSTOR1840425.
• Becker, Gary S. (July–August 1973). 'A theory of marriage: part I'. Journal of Political Economy. 81 (4): 813–46. doi:10.1086/260084. JSTOR1831130.Pdf.
• Becker, Gary S. (1974). Essays in the economics of crime and punishment. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research distributed by Columbia University Press. ISBN9780870142635.
• Becker, Gary S. (March–April 1974). 'A theory of marriage: part II'. Journal of Political Economy. 82 (2): s11–s26. doi:10.1086/260287. JSTOR1829987.Pdf.
• Becker, Gary S. (November–December 1974). 'A theory of social interactions'. Journal of Political Economy. 82 (6): 1063–93. doi:10.1086/260265. JSTOR1830662.Pdf.
• Becker, Gary S.; Ghez, Gilbert (1975). The allocation of time and goods over the life cycle. New York: National Bureau of Economic Research Distributed by Columbia University Press. ISBN9780870145148.
• Becker, Gary S. (1976), 'Pride and prejudice', in Becker, Gary S. (ed.), The economic approach to human behavior, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 15–17, ISBN9780226041124.Chapter preview.
• Becker, Gary S.; Stigler, George J. (March 1977). 'De gustibus non est disputandum'. The American Economic Review. 67 (2): 76–90. JSTOR1807222.
• Becker, Gary S.; Landes, Elizabeth; Michael, Robert T. (December 1977). 'An economic analysis of marital instability'. Journal of Political Economy. 85 (6): 1147–87. doi:10.1086/260631. JSTOR1837421.
• Becker, Gary S. (1991) [1981]. A treatise on the family. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. ISBN9780674906983.Details.
• Becker, Gary S. (August 1983). 'A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence'. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 98 (3): 371–400. doi:10.2307/1886017. JSTOR1886017.
• Becker, Gary S. (January 1985). 'Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor'. Journal of Labor Economics. 3 (1): s33–s58. doi:10.1086/298075. JSTOR2534997.

Reprinted asBecker, Gary S. (1995), 'Human capital, effort, and the sexual division of labor', in Humphries, Jane (ed.), Gender and economics, Aldershot, England Brookfield, Vermont, USA: Edward Elgar, pp. 153–78, ISBN9781852788438.

• Becker, Gary S.; Murphy, Kevin M. (August 1988). 'A theory of rational addiction'. Journal of Political Economy. 96 (4): 675–700. doi:10.1086/261558. JSTOR1830469.
• Becker, Gary S. (December 9, 1992). 'Nobel prize lecture: the economic way of looking at life'. nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB.Pdf.
• Becker, Gary S. (1996). Accounting for tastes. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. ISBN9780674543560.Preview.
• Becker, Gary S.; Becker, Guity Nashat (1997). The economics of life: from baseball to affirmative action to immigration, how real-world issues affect our everyday life. New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN9780070067097.Details.
• Becker, Gary S.; Murphy, Kevin M. (2000). Social economics market behavior in a social environment. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. ISBN9780674011212.Details.
• Becker, Gary S.; Elías, Julio Jorge (Summer 2007). 'Introducing incentives in the market for live and cadaveric organ donations'. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 21 (3): 3–24. doi:10.1257/jep.21.3.3. JSTOR30033732.Pdf.
• Becker, Gary S. (2012), 'When illegals stop crossing the border', in Miniter, Brendan (ed.), The 4% solution unleashing the economic growth America needs, New York: Crown Business, ISBN9780307986153
• Sandmo, A. (1993). Gary Becker's Contributions to Economics. The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 95(1), 7–23. doi:10.2307/3440130

See also[edit]

References[edit]

1. ^Glaeser, Edward L.; Shleifer, Andrei (2014). 'Retrospective: Gary Becker (1930–2014)'. Science. 344 (6189): 1233. Bibcode:2014Sci...344.1233G. doi:10.1126/science.1256540. PMID24926006.
2. ^Wolfers, Justin (May 5, 2014). 'How Gary Becker Transformed the Social Sciences'. New York Times.
3. ^'President Bush Announces 2007 Medal of Freedom Recipients'. Archived from the original on November 1, 2007. Retrieved 2007-10-30.CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link)
4. ^https://econjwatch.org/file_download/487/DavisMay2011.pdf
5. ^'Gary Becker (1930–2014)'. jewishvirtuallibrary.org. Jewish Virtual Library. Retrieved March 29, 2015.
6. ^Becker, Gary S. (1971). The economics of discrimination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ISBN9780226041049.Details at Google Books
7. ^Klein, Daniel B.; Daza, Ryan (September 2013). 'Ideological profiles of the economics laureates: Gary S. Becker'. Econ Journal Watch. 100 (3): 285–91.Pdf.
8. ^View/Search Fellows of the ASA, accessed 2016-08-20.
9. ^'Book of Members, 1780–2010: Chapter B'(PDF). American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Retrieved May 29, 2011.
10. ^'Mont Pelerin Society Directory'(PDF). DeSmogBlog. Retrieved January 28, 2014.
11. ^'Home page'. uchicago.edu. University of Chicago. Archived from the original on April 16, 2014. Retrieved May 4, 2014.
12. ^Teles, Steven M. (2008), 'Out of the wilderness', in Teles, Steven M. (ed.), The rise of the conservative legal movement: the battle for control of the law, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, p. 98, ISBN9781400829699.Preview.
13. ^ ^abcdHershey Jr., Robert D. (May 4, 2014). 'Gary S. Becker, 83, Nobel Winner Who Applied Economics to Everyday Life, Dies'. The New York Times. The New York Times Company. Retrieved March 19, 2017.
14. ^ ^abcBecker, Gary S. (May 3, 2014). 'Gary S. Becker - Biographical'. nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB. Retrieved June 6, 2014.
15. ^'Gary S. Becker profile'. uchicago.edu. University of Chicago. Archived from the original on October 13, 2014. Retrieved May 4, 2014.
16. ^Harms, William (May 4, 2014). 'Gary S. Becker, Nobel-winning scholar of economics and sociology, 1930–2014'. uchicago.edu. University of Chicago. Retrieved May 4, 2014.
17. ^Mankiw, N. Gregory (May 4, 2014). 'Very sad news (blog)'. gregmankiw.blogspot.co.uk. Retrieved May 4, 2014.
18. ^Baer, Stephanie K. (May 4, 2014). 'Nobel-prize winning economist Gary Becker dead at 83'. Chicago Tribune. Tribune Publishing. Retrieved June 6, 2014.
19. ^Comment, F. P. (4 November 2014). 'A school in decline: In Chicago, economists honour Gary Becker - Financial Post'.
20. ^Staff writer (June 6, 2006). 'Gary S. Becker – Facts'. nobelprize.org. Nobel Media AB.
21. ^OpenLearn. Economics explains discrimination in the labour market(PDF). Open University. Retrieved June 29, 2012.
22. ^OpenLearn. 'Economics explains discrimination in the labour market'. open.edu. Open University. Archived from the original on October 7, 2013.
23. ^Palda, Filip (2013). The apprentice economist: seven steps to mastery. Kingston, Ontario, Canada: Cooper-Wolfling. ISBN9780987788047.
24. ^Becker, Gary S. (August 1983). 'A theory of competition among pressure groups for political influence'. Quarterly Journal of Economics. 98 (3): 371–400. doi:10.2307/1886017. JSTOR1886017.
25. ^Palda, Filip. A Better Kind of Violence, Chicago Political Economy, Public Choice, and the Quest for an Ultimate Theory of Power. Cooper-Wolfling Press. 2016.
26. ^Posner, Richard A. (2004), 'The law and economics movement: from Bentham to Becker', in Posner, Richard A. (ed.), Frontiers of legal theory, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, p. 52, ISBN9780674013605.Preview.
27. ^Harcourt has also stressed Becker's wide influence on analysis of crime and punishment.
    • Harcourt, Bernard E. (2011), 'The Chicago school', in Harcourt, Bernard E. (ed.), The illusion of free markets: punishment and the myth of natural order, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, pp. 133–34, ISBN9780674057265.Preview.
28. ^Becker, Gary S. (1974), 'Crime and punishment: an economic approach', in Becker, Gary S. (ed.), Essays in the economics of crime and punishment, New York: National Bureau of Economic Research distributed by Columbia University Press, pp. 1–54, ISBN9780870142635.
29. ^Becker, Gary S. (1962). 'Investment in Human Capital – a theoretical analysis'. The Journal of Political Economy. 70 (5): 9–49. doi:10.1086/258724. JSTOR1829103.
30. ^Becker, Gary S. (1960), 'An economic analysis of fertility', in National Bureau of Economic Research (ed.), Demographic and economic change in developed countries, a conference of the universities, New York: Columbia University Press, OCLC176157.
31. ^Becker, Gary S. (September 1965). 'A theory of the allocation of time'. The Economic Journal. 75 (299): 493–517. doi:10.2307/2228949. JSTOR2228949.

    Reprinted asBecker, Gary S. (1995), 'A theory of the allocation of time', in Humphries, Jane (ed.), Gender and economics, Aldershot, England Brookfield, Vermont, USA: Edward Elgar, pp. 113–37, ISBN9781852788438.

32. ^Becker, Gary S. (July–August 1973). 'A theory of marriage: part I'. Journal of Political Economy. 81 (4): 813–46. doi:10.1086/260084. JSTOR1831130.Pdf.
33. ^Becker, Gary S.; Landes, Elizabeth; Michael, Robert T. (December 1977). 'An economic analysis of marital instability'. Journal of Political Economy. 85 (6): 1147–87. doi:10.1086/260631. JSTOR1837421.
34. ^Grossbard, Shoshana (2010). 'How 'Chicagoan' are Gary Becker's Economic Models of Marriage?'(PDF). Journal of the History of Economic Thought. 32 (3): 377–95. doi:10.1017/S1053837210000325. hdl:10419/30471.
35. ^Becker, Gary S. (1991) [1981]. A treatise on the family. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. ISBN9780674906983.Details.
36. ^Wessel, David (April 3, 2013). 'The economics of leaning in'. The Wall Street Journal. News Corp. Retrieved April 4, 2013.
37. ^Becker, Gary S.; Elías, Julio Jorge (Summer 2007). 'Introducing incentives in the market for live and cadaveric organ donations'. Journal of Economic Perspectives. 21 (3): 3–24. doi:10.1257/jep.21.3.3. JSTOR30033732.Pdf.
38. ^Jha, Vivekanand; Chugh, Kirpal S. (September 2006). 'The case against a regulated system of living kidney sales'. Nature Clinical Practice Nephrology. 2 (9): 466–67. doi:10.1038/ncpneph0268. PMID16941033.

External links[edit]

Media related to Gary Becker at Wikimedia Commons

• Becker-Posner Blog, uchicagolaw.typepad.com; accessed May 4, 2014
• Conversations with History: Interview with Gary Becker on YouTube by Harry Kreisler
• Lecture Series on Human Capital on YouTube (~25 hours)
• Profile in the Financial Times, June 2006; accessed May 4, 2014
• The Becker Center on Chicago Price Theory, pricetheory.uchicago.edu; accessed May 4, 2014
• Appearances on C-SPAN
• Roberts, Russ (July 10, 2006). 'An Interview with Gary Becker'. EconTalk. Library of Economics and Liberty.
• Gary Becker's opinion/editorials/comments for Project Syndicate, project-syndicate.org; accessed May 4, 2014
• Selected Bibliography for Gary S. Becker, University of Chicago Library; accessed May 4, 2014
• Becker, Gary S. (2008). 'Human Capital'. In David R. Henderson (ed.). Concise Encyclopedia of Economics (2nd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Library of Economics and Liberty. ISBN978-0865976658. OCLC237794267.
• Gary Stanley Becker (1930–2014). The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics. Library of Economics and Liberty (2nd ed.). Liberty Fund. 2008.
• Gary Becker publications indexed by Google Scholar

Gary Becker Economic Theory Pdf Download Torrent Free

Gary Becker Economic Theory Pdf Download Torrent Download