Good Economics for Hard Times

I am about 100 pages into Good Economics for Hard Times, a book by 2019 Noble prize for Economics winners Abhijit Banerjee and Esther Duflo. These are my takeaways so far:

1. Supply and demand do not apply to the labour market in the same way it applies to the plantain market. For example, just because many plumbers are emigrating to the UK does not necessarily mean that incumbent UK plumbers will see their wages reduced due to increased supply. There are other, and possibly more important factors to consider, such as familiarity and existing connections.
2. People can have wrong beliefs but not wrong preferences.
3. Poor people also make right decisions — suppose the federal government paid every family a $200 feeding allowance at the start of the pandemic and a family living in a remote village spent $150 on a TV, many would consider that family irrational and given to impulse spending when comparing to another family living in the city that spends $150 on food. It could be that the TV was the most important thing to them at that time since there was not much to do in a village and that the remaining $50 was enough to cover their feeding budget since they were already used to not having much to eat.
4. When you go to a bank and see people queue up at a single ATM, you are more likely to queue up at the same ATM even if there was another working ATM. That is a rational decision that you have made because you assume that the people on the queue have more information than you at the expense of your own instinct to try another ATM; this behaviour is called herd behaviour. Herd behaviour generates informational cascades whereby the information on which the first people base their decisions will have an outsized influence on what others believe.