Assignment # 3

Levitt and Dubner make an interesting argument that it is difficult to break away from “conventional wisdom.”  How often do we simply take as truth what we are told? When you listen to the news or read a statistic do you really question the validity of that statistic?  If that statistic reaffirms a belief that you have already developed it is even harder to question its validity. 

In “Drug Dealers Living with Their Moms”, the authors attempt to show that “conventional wisdom” or what is thought to be true as portrayed by the media can often be false.  Whether it is for a political motive, or an advertising ploy, individuals or groups often manipulate or exaggerate data for the purpose of their own self-interest. In the case of drug dealing in the inter-city of Chicago, the authors show that the media’s portrayal of “crack dealing as one of the most profitable jobs in America”, is wholly inaccurate.  But by creating an image of “millionaire crack dealers” destroying their communities, the media was able to focus and amplify public outrage on illegal drug distribution in he U.S.  However, by first questioning the conventional wisdom of the crack street dealer’s life style and then by examining the data recorded by firsthand observation of these low level crack dealers, the authors come to completely different conclusions about the life style and profitability of crack distribution by the street dealer.  Interestingly, the crack dealing business structure does not look too different than some of the corporate structures we see in the U.S. today. 

Four statistics that support the author’s conclusion are:

1.  “His three officers, meanwhile, each took home $700 a month, which works out to about $7 an hour.  And the foot soldiers earned just $3.30 an hour, less than the minimum wage”(100).

2.  “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”(100).

3.  “In 2003, Texas put to death twenty-four inmates-or just 5 percent of the nearly 500 inmates on its death row during that time”(102).

4. “Fifty-six percent of the neighborhood’s children lived below the poverty line…Fewer than 5 percent of the neighborhood’s adults had a college degree; barely one in three adult men worked at all”(102).

The first statistic’s placement is imperative to the story because it provides a fact that quickly refutes the conventional wisdom that was conveyed by the media that drug dealing is a highly profitable endeavor.  With this one earnings statistic the authors are able to illustrate to the reader that not only is crack dealing not very profitable but in fact most American drug dealers are paid well below the minimum wage.  By using the first statistic to show that the conventional wisdom is wrong they can then move to the question of why is crack dealing unprofitable? 

The authors then present the second statistic to show that similar to many career paths in a capitalistic system, that large financial incentives lure people into a system to deal crack cocaine but the vast majority of these incentives are reserved for the people at the top of the operating hierarchy.  Even though the majority of crack dealers do not make it past the status of “foot soldiers”, the majority still dream that one day they will make it to the highly profitable top 2.2%.  So this capitalistic dream to rise to the top creates a high demand for crack dealers but a low amount of financially successful ones.  I found it very interesting when the authors related this idea of incentives in crack dealing to football players trying to rise to the NFL.  Even though the football career path is both legal and is not life threatening it still proves to be an improbable goal in bringing financial success except to a very minute percentage of football players.  At the same time so many men in poverty spend their time trying to reach this top financial bracket (whether in the NFL, NBA, MLB, or even a professional soccer league in less developed countries).  It would be interesting to see a study about this relationship between professional sports, income, and poverty. 

The next statistic about the amount of deaths that occur on death row in Texas is used as a comparison to the amount of deaths in crack dealing.  By making this comparison they can reinforce how undesirable the crack dealing profession should be.  Jobs that have high danger and risk usually pay better than low risk jobs, but crack dealing is incredibly high risk and pays very low. 

By using statistics to show that crack dealing is both an unprofitable and incredibly dangerous profession they then pose the question of why would anyone seek such a profession.  This question allows them to then insert a statistic that sheds light on their economic and cultural environment.  Because of their bleak environmental circumstances the poor are forced to grow up in, high paying legitimate jobs are not accessible to them.  Instead they see, reach for and start climbing the crack dealer corporate ladder. Many poor see it as their best possible option to climb out of poverty.