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.

Chapter 2 poor economics takes a very good look at poverty traps that are around the world. Many of the problems that seem to come with this trap seem to arise from a pure lack of investment in human capital. For example poor monetary institutions make it very difficult to break the trap. My question would  be why these institutions are unable to act more efficiently. Like the problem in India the lending body should be able to distinguish between the different classes. At least in this class of family why would the loaning agency increase the interest to a level unattainable by the already struggling family.

Another question that I had for the reading is when they mentioned the investment needed to prevent the spread of malaria. The authors do a great job of explaining how a low funding can deter these investments but my question is why would an outside agency not donate the necessary funds if the return on that investment is so high. While throughout the chapter the "poverty trap" is described in detail I cannot help but wonder how much foreign investment is necessary for a poverty trap, such as a health trap, to be broken. I guess I can kind of answer this question myself. Combining my knowledge of the first two chapters of freakenomics it is obvious that foreign investment does not see a benefit from investing in health care. The only people who are willing to invest are too poor, poverty trap.

Finally what is the estimated amount of calories necessary? And how can they not attain in. Even after reading the book I noticed some investment is made by outside corporations and they seem to be feeding the poor...or at least in the commercials.

Hey World,

So it my first time using a blog and I guess im going to approach it like my personal journal.