Print

Print


Miscommunication here. I'm from Europe. My experiences are drawn from that
pot.

Phil

On Saturday, 14 May 2016, Hopkins, Barbara E. <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

> 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 shielded 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-assistance/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]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[log in to unmask]);>
> www.wright.edu/~barbara.hopkins
> Sent from Mail for Windows 10
>
>
>
> *From: *Linwood Tauheed
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[log in to unmask]);>
> *Sent: *Friday, May 13, 2016 8:35 PM
> *To: *[log in to unmask]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[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 w*hich 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]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[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]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml',[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]>
>>> 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]> 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]
>>>>> *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]
>>>>> *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 and 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]
>>>>> <#m_-2633567896810551105_m_585571547717877223_m_743450686717580733_m_-7897436544169904802_m_-2749118744887126702__ftn1>
>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>> Cell: 801 550-5834
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> [1]
>>>>> <#m_-2633567896810551105_m_585571547717877223_m_743450686717580733_m_-7897436544169904802_m_-2749118744887126702__ftnref1>
>>>>> “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
>
>

-- 
Philip Pilkington

Tel: 0044(0)7825371244
Twitter: https://twitter.com/pilkingtonphil
Academic Publications:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=1508797