Q1. The Matthew effect in Robert Holmes project
The Matthew effect refers to the situation in which the richer get richer while the poor continue to be poorer (Gladwell, 15). The lives and prospects of the people of Robert Holmes coupled with the exposition of Gladwell in his book “Outliers” tend to justify the Matthew effect. They lend credence that it is extra ordinary opportunities that we are faced with in life that shape us rather than extra ordinary talents. It is therefore no surprise that the people of Robert Holmes, who are predominantly black, are stuck with poverty no matter their tacit attempts to escape from it.
Gladwell argues that we live within a social structure that defines our lives rather than individuals defining how the super structure will be (7). He gives examples of successful individuals and is of the view that they are predisposed to certain opportunities that make them better in the long run. They are able to exploit the opportunities owing to the ability to have a good support system as was the case with Bill Gates who came from a rich background (Gladwell, 51).
In regard to the Robert Holmes project, the blacks have historically lived in poverty, which appears to a self-fulfilling cycle. Even in the event that an extra opportunity arises for a black person in the project arises, they are unable to fully exploit it. This is because rather than concentrate on it, they are pre-occupied with finding income to enable them have some basic needs. At the same time, the opportunities that they can readily exploit are considered as social vices as was the case with the drug dealing business the Black Kings were engaged in. Therefore, rather than have a competitive advantage on a socially acceptable activity, they have the same social vice which puts them at odds with the rest of the society. This is evidenced by JT’s failure to succeed in the laundry business despite his management prowess in the drug dealing business (Venkatesh, 312).
Q2. Gang Leader For a Day
“Gang Leader For a Day” offers an insight into the failures of the Chicago city in protecting the minority blacks. It is the failures of the city that exacerbated the perpetuation of the cycle of poverty in Chicago. It is clear that the city authorities rather than tackle the issues that faced the people of the Robert Holmes projects, they chose to ignore them which put them at the mercy of drug lords such as JT and rogue quasi politicians such as Ms. Bailey (Venkatesh, 117).
The failure of the city to address the issue of racism meant that blacks such as JT, despite having completed college, could not find jobs that would give them career progression. In denying them such an opportunity, despite having acquired the requisite education, the city’s actions by commission or omission led to the blacks resorting to the street to gain some income.
Despite the dangerous position that policing and providing services to the Robert Holmes projects posed to city authorities, ignoring them all together made the situation worse. The police and ambulance services considered the projects a no-go zone. By denying the residents such services, it allowed the emergence of quasi political authorities such as those of Ms. Bailey, a local housing executive who uses her connection to the city authorities to gain favors that further lead to the degrading of the project’s inhabitants. Such actions implicitly meant that the city authorities bent the rules to the disadvantage of the blacks in Robert Holmes.
As Venkatesh leaves the projects, it is decided by the city authorities that the projects have to be demolished to pave way for transformation. The transformation would involve instituting mixed developments, which would, in essence, lead to the displacement of the poor blacks leaving in the projects.
Q3. Ariely’s discussion on dishonesty and the illicit activities of Wall Street managers during the stock market crush
Based on Ariely’s discussion on dishonesty, it is evident that wall strategies endeared themselves to some cognitive biases (Ariely). While it may appear normal as is the case with all human beings, the managers were aware of the irrationality of their biases. They however decided to push on with their activities despite their irrationality purely based on self-interest.
One of the ways in which the managers perpetuated their dishonesty is through the use of arbitrary anchors. They repackaged toxic subprime mortgage assets for onward selling to unaware investors. The managers succeeded in doing this by creating an illusion of an ever rising price for such assets coupled with a fast moving pace. Human beings are cognitively wired to associate high prices with high quality irrespective of the forces of demand and supply in the market (Ariely).
The social norm that would normally instill a sense of moral responsibility on the part of the managers no longer existed. It is in line with Ariely’s finding that social norms tend to have a shorter life span when compared to market norms. There was an element of self-interest on the bankers that pushed them more towards the market norm as they stood to gain more through bonuses and such they resorted to giving false information to their clients on the financial soundness of the subprime mortgages they were selling to them.
Works Cited
Ariely, Dan. "Predictably Irrational" May 2016. PowerPoint presentation.
Gladwell, Malcolm. Outliers. Newyork. Little, Brown, and Company. 2008. Print.
Venkatesh, Sudhir. Gang Leader For a Day. London: Penguin Books. 2008. Print.
