Chapter 4 of the book focuses on problems within schooling systems around the world. The chapter focuses on the problem within a supply and demand framework. The main question or problem asserted in the chapter is why schools continue to fail. The chapter has two very different answers to this question. On the supply side some argue the government is responsible for providing children with better schooling. This will require increased spending for local governments. Many of the problems within the schools are poor faculty, poor resources and poor facilities. The supply argument believes that the government should be willing to provide these necessities. On the demand side of the argument the chapter states that parents do no lobby for quality education because they do not see a direct benefit from schooling. “When the benefits of education become high enough, enrollment will go up, without the state having to push it.” Pg 76 Parents expect both too much and too little from schooling. For example passing college will get you a good job while passing high school can get you nowhere now-a- days. The parents do not see the benefit of their investment in their child’s education. Either their child reaps the benefits sometime in the future or they default on the investment. From the chapter it is obvious that neither problem is the sole cause. Each must be evaluated in order to solve the problem of poor schooling.

I found an article on the poverty ridden educational infrastructure in Mumbai India. My article was in the Wall Street Journal and is called “India Journal: The Basic Shortages that Plague our Schools”. http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2012  This article deals directly with the supply side of the argument presented in the book. The Indian government is unable or unwilling to fun adequate educational infrastructure. Many of the overcrowded cities have very poor facilities with, in one case, no books to be used.  While the past decade has seen an increase in efforts to increase infrastructure many critics argue that more of an emphasize should be put on learning outcomes.  Some good statistics that the author uses is a survey showing 81,000 schools operate without chalkboards and 42,000 government schools operate without a building. These staggering numbers show the problems within the schools. Another good point made by the author is the loss in teacher and student motivation due to the poor schooling infrastructures. This plays into the chapters demand side argument.

  

Using www.bls.gov/nls I will be looking at the trends in housing sales in a specified area. I will be looking at the four areas of the U.S. (midwest, south, west, northeast) I will be tracking the housing sales over the time period during the financial crisis. My thesis is; Did areas located near the epicenter of the crisis (New York) have more  mortgage defaults than other areas.

The problem with accumulating data is I will have to distinguish what is mortgage defaults and what is sales due to relocation. My main objective will be to look at data for ears before and after the crisis.

This chapter looks at a street gang in the housing projects of Chicago. Sociologist Sudhir Venkatesh befriended many of the street gang members and was able to attain several years of financial records of the gang. Levitt was able to use these financial records to debunk the belief that crack dealers are very wealthy. The top guys receive a lot of money from their dealings but many of the street hustlers make barely enough money to survive on. A good comparison of the crack game is of Mcdonalds which has the top executives and owners making money while the cashiers and store workers make very little. Levitt actually found that most drug dealers made less than minimum wage. Levitt also acknowledged that the risk of death greatly outweighed any reward. 


“Fifty-six percent of the neighborhood’s children lived below the poverty live (compared to a national average of 18 percent).” Page 105
This extreme poverty within the neighborhood shows the draw into illegal drug selling. Most of these individuals do not have the funds to achieve a higher education to set a foundation for a better life so dealing drugs is the best way for income.
The top 120 men in the Black Disciples gang represented just 2.2 percent of the full fledged gang membership but took home well more than half the money.” Page 103
This statistic shows the inequality among the gang members. Not everyone is making money. As stated above there are a select few who run the drugs and attain the most profit. 
“In the 1920’s, Chicago alone had more than 1,300 street gangs…”Page 111
Street gangs have always been a problem. This statistic shows how cities will always have illegal activities take place. 
“…black infant mortality began to soar in the 1980’s, as did the rate of low-birth weight babes and parent abandonment.” Page 113
This is a great example of the crack epidemic that was driven by gang activity. The crack epidemic is still considered the worst and most notorious drug epidemic in history. 

I was really interested in Chapter 3. Over the past two semesters I have had two classes that looked very closely to not only a health trap but the overall poverty trap. The reason I was so into this chapter is because the authors make a good point concerning the numerous preventative technologies that could slow, if not stop, the health trap as we know it. I was also surprised to learn that the cheap preventative technologies are not used to their full potential. My assessment of this chapter will look at why these solutions are not used by the poor suffering from such a poverty trap.
So my main question is why are these solutions not used?
Without reading the chapter my answer to this question would be that poor infrastructure does not make these solutions easily accessible. After reading the chapter I found that it does involve government infrastructure. While the government may be able to make the preventative treatments easily accessible, the government must have the trust of their citizens to adequately treat them. As mentioned in the chapter badly trained doctors may mistreat which will cause a resistance to the health system. So poor spending on educating doctors can lead to mistreatment which can lead to an overall loss of trust for the system. This example is explained by the government nurses in India who's poor treatment leads to patients not returning. Government spending on training is not the only way they can help. Government spending on adequate water is also essential. In  Poor Economics the authors show that the introduction of piped water along with chlorine tablets contributed heavily to the decrease in mortality rates.
Government spending is very important to break the health trap.