LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for AFEEMAIL Archives


AFEEMAIL Archives

AFEEMAIL Archives


AFEEMAIL@LISTSERV.UNL.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

AFEEMAIL Home

AFEEMAIL Home

AFEEMAIL  May 2016

AFEEMAIL May 2016

Subject:

Re: Ideological element among Institutionalists?

From:

"Mayhew, Anne" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

AFEEMAIL Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 15 May 2016 14:03:43 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (236 lines)

Chris makes a number of good points.  I would add that anyone who has not yet read Jane Mayer's DARK MONEY should do so.  It is a thoroughly documented account of how our state legislatures are being managed by an interwoven (thanks Greg!) group of moneyed interests.

--Anne

________________________________________
From: AFEEMAIL Discussion List <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Christopher Brown <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 9:20 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [AFEEMAIL] Ideological element among Institutionalists?

Some random thoughts:

     The low income population in America contributes a disproportionate share of revenues received by Big Corn (ADM, Monsanto, the big food processors), the soft drink industry, tobacco, the potato industry, the pizza and hamburger chains (see Fast Food Nation). There is a lot of pressure to live our lives in way that, at the aggregate level, sustains the cash flows (and share prices) of these great business organizations. This will be difficult to change.

     Good nutrition is a necessary condition for human development and flourishing. Michael Harrington talked about high starch diets in The Other America. Public schools and universities evolved into platforms for the sale and consumption of products filled with high fructose corn syrup.

    Two retired Professors living in my neighborhood work at the local food bank two days a week. They report that food insecurity is most definitely a problem. They also report that most of the people that come to the food bank have a least one employed person in the household.

    To give credit where credit is due, Obamacare has made a major impact in Arkansas, one of the only Southern states which accepted the Medicaid expansion. In combination with the money we got from the 2009 stimulus bill, it is fair to say the President Obama has done more for the State of Arkansas than Bill Clinton ever did. Guaranteed health coverage has an empowering effect on the lives of people in low-wage jobs. It can open up new economic options. It alters the "social relationships of production." I think it may shift the balance of power in labor market transactions (however marginally) in favor of sellers. It would certainly explain why so many employers of low wage labor are desperate to stop Obamacare.  The Southern governors are turning down a lot of money by refusing the Medicaid expansion. I mean, health care providers in their states would see their revenues increase, as they have in every state that went along. The small business lobby, along with the Ricke!
 tts family, the Wal-Mart heirs,and  the Koch brothers are the major forces in reshaping state legislatures in southern states (as documented by, among others, Greg Hayden). This is (partly) about preserving/expanding degrees of power in labor transactions, or maintaining an established status hierarchy.

Chris Brown
_______________________________________
From: AFEEMAIL Discussion List [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Watkins [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 5:07 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Ideological element among Institutionalists?

Barbara and everyone else

Thank you all for what has become an interesting, important and constructive conversation. Barbara in particular, thank you for these references. I will check them out. The argument regarding hunger in America, despite its importance, was tangential to the argument that I was trying to make, which I will spare you all. In terms of my argument, Anne’s comments were particularly helpful. And I am certainly trying to understand the nature of poverty in America, as I think we all are, and the use of the threat of hunger to motivate people, which serves as the basis for the mainstream explanation for why people work (they call it disutility—yes, I would say going hungry is dissatisfying, but it should be called what it is, attempting to starve people to induce them to work).

I was somewhat mystified by Jim’s comments. Your explanation Barbara helps, a fact that I was unaware. My wife teaches fifth grade at a Title one School. There underprivileged children are fed both breakfast and lunch. And a truck brings food to the school for the parents to take every weekend. Some parents may be too proud to partake; some, for whatever reason, may not have access; and I have no idea if native Americans on Reservations have access, although I would think they would. So even if they lack food stamps, other sources may exist.

Logically, food insecurity characterizes  the bottom quintile of households in terms of income: 44% are comprised of single women with children, 20% are over 65, which helps explain the situation of 2/3 of the bottom quintile. Even so, 45% worked (part or full time). (Data compiled from Current Population Survey, 2013 Annual Social and Economic Supplement: FINC-06. http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/032012/faminc/finc06_000.xls) . All of this suggests that it is difficult to get a good picture of poverty in America.

The really obscene point, mentioned again by Barbara and with which I whole heartily agree, is the largesse provided to the wealthy.


From: AFEEMAIL Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Hopkins, Barbara E.
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2016 11:43 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Ideological element among Institutionalists?

John,
          You might find The Challenge of Affluence<http://www.amazon.com/Challenge-Affluence-Self-Control-Well-Being-Britain/dp/0198208537> relevant to your topic.  He has a chapter on obesity.  He explains why weight loss can be tied to class privilege.  There is another chapter on smoking that is also more prevalent among the poor.  I think the cultural focus on obesity is part of an effort to refocus us all on the overconsumption of the poor, so that we are distracted from the overconsumption of the rich.  But, as someone pointed out, obesity cannot be reduced to “overconsumption.”  It is also about nutrition.  There is some evidence<http://www.motherearthnews.com/real-food/signs-of-nutrient-decline-zmaz04jjzsel.aspx> that food has less nutrients per calorie than in the past.  You point out the link between adequate food and health, but I’m pretty sure that  It is also linked to time poverty, because access to fresh fruits and vegetables can be difficult and eating a big!
  mac is both quick and cheap. And, as Zdravka and I wrote<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/270250152_Gender_Dimensions_of_the_US_Consumer_Borrowing_Expansion>, the increase in women’s labor force participation means less time for household production among the working poor.  Cooking beans and rice takes a long time. The other issue is whether one has the facilities.  In high cost housing places like San Francisco, one might not be able to afford more than a hot plate.
          Your link between adequate food and health is important, but overstated.  Poor health (of both mother and child) is one of the barriers<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2667863/> to getting a job, or a decent job, for a lot of poor women with kids. For kids with food allergies the food bank doesn’t necessarily have food they can eat.  The role of mental illness here might be particularly interesting, because it would affect the ability for some form of deprivation to effect social control.
          Also, in response to the claim that hungry kids are the children of people who sell their food stamps – First, it is different to say this happens – anecdotal evidence is sufficient for that – and “this is typical”. It is incorrect to assume that everyone that needs assistance, gets it.<http://www.iwpr.org/publications/pubs/the-children-left-behind-deeper-poverty-fewer-supports-1> After the financial collapse 62% of poor women did not receive food stamps<http://www.iwpr.org/press-room/press-releases/public-assistance-not-reaching-poor-women-during-recession>. (67.5% of poor women in New Mexico, which, for those of you who were not at the session, represents the anecdotal evidence Jim used to challenge John’s premise.) Yes, most of those people are getting food somehow, leaving their kids alone so they don’t have to pay for childcare, not fixing stuff when it breaks, taking out payday loans. When I looked at the USDA data some years ago, children were entirely shiel!
 ded from “hunger” or “disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake that characterize very low food security” (that means that mothers (we are mostly talking mothers) went hungry so they could feed their kids first).  Today,<http://www.ers.usda.gov/media/1896836/err194_summary.pdf> (or rather two years ago and going back two years before that) that still happens, but for 1.1 percent of households with children, “both children and adults experienced instances of very low food security.” That means that at sometime during the year they skipped meals or ate less because they could not afford it. Does that mean children are more likely  to be hungry or poisoned with lead?  I’m not sure, but probably the lead thing. While I agree that this isn’t the means for motivating people (if I understood Anne’s comment, neither did Polanyi), I think that hunger is a bigger problem than most people realize and growing and deepening<http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistanc!
 e/food-security-in-the-us/key-statistics-graphics.aspx#trends>!
  and NOT exclusively a problem of drug addicted homeless people (after all homeless people are not covered by the USDA survey, since it covers “households”).
          I think it is intuitive that “the nature of poverty” has changed.  I also think that poverty looks different in different places and among different groups (lone mothers, for example).  Poverty in Northern New Mexico (or Southern New Mexico) looks very different from poverty in Baltimore or Chicago or Detroit. But, I think that to focus on this point (the idea that poverty is different than we think it is) requires reading some ethnography, such as http://www.amazon.com/New-Poverty-Studies-Ethnography-Impoverished/dp/0814731163 reviewed http://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2863&context=jssw
         In The Milagro Beanfield War, a fictional account of property rights vs. water rights and subsistence farming vs. wage labor in Northern New Mexico, one of the main characters says “Do you remember when we were not rich, but when our poverty was not a thing to be ashamed of?”
There have been shifts over time back and forth as to how much we blame people for their economic misfortune.  Those enabling myths are an important part of the mechanisms for social control.
Barbara


Barbara Hopkins, Ph.D.
Economics Dept.
Wright State University
3640 Col. Glenn Hwy
Dayton, OH 45435
office: 937 775-2080
211 Rike
Fax: 937 775-2441
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
www.wright.edu/~barbara.hopkins<http://www.wright.edu/~barbara.hopkins>
Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Linwood Tauheed<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 8:35 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Ideological element among Institutionalists?

Philip:
Assuming your response was to my request for "data, studies, or other information":

 1.  I have no idea what you mean by "I'm open to it" or "Certainly."
 2.  My question was about whether you could provide "data, studies, or other information to substantiate your claim".  I assume from your non-response on this point that you cannot.
 3.  Your anecdotal experience is not sufficient to substantiate your claim.  JK Galbraith has alerted us to the dangers contained in the "conventional wisdom".  William Dugger has alerted us to the power of the "enabling myth" in maintaining the status quo.
 4.  Since this is a discussion of ideology among institutionalists I think it is appropriate to appeal to that tradition for commentary.

Gunnar Myrdal wrote the following in "Value in Social Theory" (1958 - originally 1944 as an appendix of "An American Dilemma").  (I'm not asserting that your use of "children in very run-down schools" is a reference to racial characteristics, but the correlation is high and so I thought referring to Myrdal was appropriate.)

There are in the Negro problem whole systems of popular beliefs concerning the Negro and his relations to the larger society which are crudely false and can only be understood in this light. These 'popular theories' or ideologies are themselves important data in our study, as they represent strategic social facts in the practical and political problems of race relations. A legitimate task of education is to attempt to correct popular beliefs by subjecting them to rigorous examination in the light of the factual evidence. This educational objective must be achieved in the face of the psychic resistance mobilized by the people who feel an urgent need to retain their biased beliefs in order to justify their way of life. (my emphasis)

In a more penetrating analysis all tendencies to bias will be found to have involved relations among themselves and with deeper ideological tendencies which have even shaped our main conceptional tools in social science ... These ideological tendencies are biased in a static and do-nothing (laissez-faire) conservative direction, which, in the main, works against a disfavored group like the American Negroes.

Myrdal comes to these insights as a result of leading an actual empirical research project on American race relations, the most in depth study even to this date, in which he collaborated with economists, political scientists, sociologists, historians, educators, philosophers, and psychologists among other disciplines.  In fact, it was during this project that Myrdal states that he became an "Institutional Economist", from being a neoclassical economist, as he confronted his own ideological positions, and found them lacking because they did not conform to data, studies and other information.

In a section titled "BIASES IN THE RESEARCH ON THE AMERICAN NEGRO PROBLEM" Myrdal delineates categories of biases; among them:

 1.   "The Scale of 'Friendliness' to the Negro" - which by inference would apply to "liberal" bias, and
 2.   "The Scale of 'Friendliness' to the South" - which by inference would apply to "conservative" bias.
 3.   "The Scale of Radicalism-Conservatism" -  which directly addressed the liberal-conservative split, and
 4.   "The Scale of Scientific Integrity."

On this last "Scale" Myrdal writes:
The degree to which a scientist is prepared to study unpopular subjects and to state plainly and clearly unpopular conclusions derived from his findings depends, naturally, on his own political inclinations, his personal courage, and the relative freedom awarded him by society. These factors, however, are not independent of each other. In communities where academic freedom is low, the scientist normally will, in adjustment to the environment in which he works, develop, on the one hand, a dislike for controversial matters and for clear and bluntly scientific statements concerning them, and, on the other hand, an unduly high valuation of agreement and conformity as such. Quite independent of the favorable or unfavorable judgment society passes upon such an attitude, it is, of course, detrimental to scientific clarity and objectivity and to scientific progress. (emphasis mine)

Certainly, what would distinguish the institutional approach from the neoclassical is the importance placed on producing "scientific" evidence from real world empirical research on which to base theory.  To the extent that institutionalism, as a community, de-values research on "unpopular subjects", or unpopular conclusions from findings, it diminishes academic freedom.  However, those conclusions, if not based on data, studies or other information are "mere" opinion, and everyone has theirs.

I use this reading in my Institutional Economic Theory class as a way of encouraging my students to come to the realization that we are all biased in our opinions, but we have an obligation, as social scientists, to work to get beyond our ideological "mere opinions" to Dewey's "warranted assertability".

Linwood





On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Philip Pilkington <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
I'm open to it. Certainly. But it does happen. I know it because I've seen it up close. With some of my friends and some of their family's kids. And if liberal types want to deny it due to their own ideological predilections, that's on the.

Btw on the original question... Yes this is heavily ideological from what I can see. A picture painted by the middle class to avoid the truth of what is going on.

Phil


On Friday, 13 May 2016, Linwood Tauheed <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

Philip wrote:

"You also sometimes find children that are hungry in very run-down schools, for example. But this is typically because the parents are flogging food stamps for drugs or alcohol."

Philip, would you provide data, studies, or other information to substantiate you claim that there are children in very run-down schools who are hungry because their parents traded food stamps for drugs and alcohol?

I'm curious.

Linwood Tauheed
On May 13, 2016 9:48 AM, "Philip Pilkington" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
John,

Seems to me perfectly coherent. Hunger -- as in, the need for food -- is not a problem in most Western countries. And yes, obesity and obesity-related interests (diabetes etc) now seem far more prevalent among poorer people.

Food banks and soup kitchens do still exist in the US. But these appear to be mainly for homeless people and drug addicts. I think it's the homelessness and drug addiction that are the main problems here, not lack of food per se.

You also sometimes find children that are hungry in very run-down schools, for example. But this is typically because the parents are flogging food stamps for drugs or alcohol.

In Greece you do seem to have old style soup kitchens reemerging:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/06/greece-food-crisis-summer-austerity<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.theguardian.com_world_2013_aug_06_greece-2Dfood-2Dcrisis-2Dsummer-2Dausterity&d=CwMFaQ&c=3buyMx9JlH1z22L_G5pM28wz_Ru6WjhVHwo-vpeS0Gk&r=eUwz24ZOHF_27smkcXilYmeJwIgj_MK5LvDb-_0dUr8&m=xJTJs4lUFWMXa14tmCfUE4chbGek-txKQYUHwn8rOLQ&s=GtBAGDke-7xNsHA57yeE_QYIJsnlQu-Smd4-3E0wwgw&e=>

But even there it's not really like the classic soup kitchen that would literally feed starving people. It seems more so that people who are hard up use the facilities to save money that they then spend on other things -- like clothes and books for their children.

I think you're right: poverty today increasingly looks like poisonous overconsumption; of bad quality food and of drugs and alcohol.

Best,

Phil

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:11 PM, John Watkins <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Michael,

Thank you for your comments. I agree: hunger is imprecise. And while most people maybe fed, they are not well fed. Even here, as you suggest, there is controversy regarding what it means to be well fed. Obviously, we have many people who are not going hungry (nutrition is another issue), but other needs are going without.

My point is that the nature of poverty has changed. And it is important to trace those changes. Amartya Sen had an interesting comment, which may seem obvious after said. Needs are a function of what is possible. His point is that living 200 years is not a need because it is not possible. Hence, poverty itself, loosely defined as the inability to satisfy needs, is a matter of what is possible.

john






From: AFEEMAIL Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Keaney
Sent: Friday, May 13, 2016 12:19 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Ideological element among Institutionalists?

Hi John

Hunger is perhaps too imprecisely defined – and reducing everything to calories ignores the issue of nutrition. I attach two relatively recent FT reports that have some bearing on your topic. Especially the Fifield article is quite damning about the state of grocery retail in the US, and may be read in conjunction with Eric Schlosser’s classic “Fast Food Nation”. Not so long ago Europe had its own horse meat scandal, revealing just how little is known of the supply chains feeding us. “Soylent Green” also comes to mind!

Michael

From: AFEEMAIL Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Watkins
Sent: 12. toukokuuta 2016 20:39
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Ideological element among Institutionalists?

At the recent AFIT meetings, I presented a paper that received considerable criticism. Criticism, of course, is fine, even desirable. I have to wonder, however, if the source of the criticism, in fact, lay in our own ideological blinders. The point that received the most criticism was my claim that hunger is not the problem it was once, at least in the West.

The response led me to wonder if I had attacked a sacred cow, if ideology had blinded my fellow institutionalists to changes in the American economy. I know of no way to go about research other than the use theory and facts. I try to confront ideology wherever I find it, which is usually among mainstream economists. This is not to say that we, too, wear occasionally ideological blinders.

Polanyi refers to the use of hunger as a means of motivating people in the19th century civilization. Polanyi uses hunger as a term for needs generally.

I asserted that the muted response to the financial crisis was, in part, that hunger was no longer the problem it was once. Although the popularity of both Trump and Sanders may reveal up to now a silent, growing response to the crisis and how it was handled. Its silence, however, is not motivated by hunger.

My point is despite the rise in inequality, most people suffer from too much food, not too little. The United States Department of Agriculture prefers the term food security to hunger, meaning that the people have sufficient calories (2100 calories per day for an adult) to perform their daily functions. The importance of food security cannot be underestimated. Good nutrition improves the ability to avoid and fight disease, improving longevity (See McKeown 1983). Data from the US Department of Agriculture indicates that food insecurity with hunger increased from 3.1 % in 2001 to 5.7% of households during 2008 and 2009. Overall, food insecurity comprised 19.2 percent of households. The USDA defines food insecurity as households “unable to acquire adequate food for one or more household members because they had insufficient money and other resources for food” (Coleman-Jensen, Rabbitt, Gregory and Singh 2015a, 8). Admittedly, there is a difference between the threat of hunger an!
 d hunger itself. In 2014, nineteen percent of households expressed concern that money until the next check would be insufficient (Coleman-Jensen, Rabbitt, Gregory and Singh 2015b, Table S-5, p. 10). Nevertheless, the report surmises that food insecurity in the United States is not chronic.[1] Even so, food insecurity persists among more marginalized groups: minorities, single women with children, low-income groups, and so on.

All of this was resurrected for me by an article in The Wall Street Journal today titled “Obesity: The New Hunger.” The Journal, of course, is hardly a progressive paper. Nevertheless, we would be remiss to ignore analyses and the facts presented. I do not deny that hunger still exists in America. And the criticisms I received were anecdotal, which I do not deny. Nor do I deny the increase in inequality and the inability of many people to satisfy other needs. But is hunger the issue that it once was? Or as progressives, are we ignoring the facts? Are we ignoring changes in the nature of poverty itself?

John P. Watkins
Professor of Economics
Westminster College
1840 South 1300 East
Salt Lake City, UT 84105
Office: 801 832-2628<tel:801%20832-2628>
Cell: 801 550-5834<tel:801%20550-5834>


________________________________

________________________________

________________________________

[1] “When households experience very low food security in the United States, the resulting instances of reduced food intake and disrupted eating patterns are usually occasional or episodic but are not usually chronic” (Coleman-Jensen, Rabbitt, Gregory and Singh 2015a, 11).



--
Philip Pilkington
Tel: 0044(0)7825371244
Twitter: https://twitter.com/pilkingtonphil<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_pilkingtonphil&d=CwMFaQ&c=3buyMx9JlH1z22L_G5pM28wz_Ru6WjhVHwo-vpeS0Gk&r=eUwz24ZOHF_27smkcXilYmeJwIgj_MK5LvDb-_0dUr8&m=xJTJs4lUFWMXa14tmCfUE4chbGek-txKQYUHwn8rOLQ&s=BrjTr8E_OCc1cTAnLvCf-od-FYJl0NWC76dZrC6L310&e=>
Academic Publications: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=1508797<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__papers.ssrn.com_sol3_cf-5Fdev_AbsByAuth.cfm-3Fper-5Fid-3D1508797&d=CwMFaQ&c=3buyMx9JlH1z22L_G5pM28wz_Ru6WjhVHwo-vpeS0Gk&r=eUwz24ZOHF_27smkcXilYmeJwIgj_MK5LvDb-_0dUr8&m=xJTJs4lUFWMXa14tmCfUE4chbGek-txKQYUHwn8rOLQ&s=PQRH_d-hPdLWLlB8Drhj4NSqgNRW2X8sEbARCIhXc7Q&e=>


--
Philip Pilkington
Tel: 0044(0)7825371244
Twitter: https://twitter.com/pilkingtonphil<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__twitter.com_pilkingtonphil&d=CwMFaQ&c=3buyMx9JlH1z22L_G5pM28wz_Ru6WjhVHwo-vpeS0Gk&r=eUwz24ZOHF_27smkcXilYmeJwIgj_MK5LvDb-_0dUr8&m=xJTJs4lUFWMXa14tmCfUE4chbGek-txKQYUHwn8rOLQ&s=BrjTr8E_OCc1cTAnLvCf-od-FYJl0NWC76dZrC6L310&e=>
Academic Publications: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=1508797<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__papers.ssrn.com_sol3_cf-5Fdev_AbsByAuth.cfm-3Fper-5Fid-3D1508797&d=CwMFaQ&c=3buyMx9JlH1z22L_G5pM28wz_Ru6WjhVHwo-vpeS0Gk&r=eUwz24ZOHF_27smkcXilYmeJwIgj_MK5LvDb-_0dUr8&m=xJTJs4lUFWMXa14tmCfUE4chbGek-txKQYUHwn8rOLQ&s=PQRH_d-hPdLWLlB8Drhj4NSqgNRW2X8sEbARCIhXc7Q&e=>




--
Linwood F. Tauheed, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Economics
University of Missouri-Kansas City
5100 Rockhill Road, 202D Manheim Hall
Kansas City, Missouri 64110

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
December 1994
November 1994
October 1994

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.UNL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager