Pianists in a brothel, These present discontents #ConquestofDough #EROEI

These present discontents #ConquestofDough #EROEI
rogerglewisMay 24, 2018Uncategorized

Stealing this Joke for The Conquest of Dough

@page { margin: 0.79in } p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120% }

Even by its own lights, this neoliberal orthodoxy has failed, becoming progressively more economically destructive. Outsourcing skilled, well-paid jobs whilst maintaining the relentless adulation of consumption has driven debt sharply upwards, such that ten-year growth of £215bn in British GDP has been accompanied by a £1,370bn escalation in debt. Undermining the tax base has undercut the provision of public services, whilst monetary policies geared towards co-existence with debt have created huge deficits in pension provision. The emphasis on the pursuit of quick material gain has favoured speculation whilst undermining the patient creation of value through innovation and initiative. The uncomfortable suspicion lurks that, when the economy slumps, pension provision collapses and the debt burden becomes overwhelming, the masterminds of this state of affairs will already have departed to pastures new.

Although they were recorded in 1938, Jelly Roll Morton’s unedited Library Of Congress recordings weren’t released in their entirety for over fifty years, because some parts were just too damn dirty. Here are Jelly’s most risqué songs, along with his tales of turn of the century New Orleans whorehouses, honky tonks, neighborhood parades and pimp attire. Not for the faint of heart.
1 The Dirty Dozen 4:30
This is “The Dirty Dozen.” I really think this originated in Chicago. I heard this tune about 1908, when I happened to be in Chicago. It seems like Chicago had been, started to be, beginning to be a freakish center. It seems like that there was a lot of sayings about what the different people would be doing and the uncultured way and the sex appeal. So I heard that song then.
Oh you dirty motherfucker
You old cocksucker
You dirty son of a bitch
You bastard
You’re everything
And yo’ mammy don’t wear no drawers
Yes, you did me this, you did me that
You did your father
You did your mother
You did everybody you come to
‘Cause yo’ mammy don’t wear no drawers
That’s the Dirty Dozen
Oh, the Dirty lovin’ Dozen
The Dirty Dozen
Yes yo’ mammy don’t wear no drawers
This would be played in the houses in Chicago where they didn’t mind about the language. Different places, sometimes I would visit these places. I was supposed to be one of the higher-ups. ‘Course I’d sometimes I’d walk in and catch those things. It would be very embarrassing a lot of times, just the fact that old King Jelly Roll Morton was there. But I’d catch ’em and they wouldn’t stop. Just keep on playing, you know. Some would care and some of ’em wouldn’t. The gals, they would have their dress up way up to their ass. Just shakin’ it and breakin’ it. At that time they wore what you called—the ladies did—the split drawers. They’d just be shakin’ it down. And some guy plunking on the piano, some rough looking guy, I wouldn’t know who he was. They had several of ’em. And they’d sing it right over and over. They’d sing all kinds of verses. Some of them meant something, some of them didn’t have any rhymes, and some did and so forth and on.
So I had a bitch
Wouldn’t fuck me ’cause she had the itch
Yes she’s my bitch
Oh yo’ mammy wouldn’t wear no drawers

The main theme was the mammy wouldn’t wear no drawers, I thought it was a very disgusting mammy that wouldn’t wear some underwear

Said you dirty motherfucker
You old cocksucker
You dirty son of a bitch
Oh everything you know
Oh you low bitch
Yes and everything you’ll do
Mmm—yes—mmm, Lord
Yes you did
Yes you dirty bitch
Suck my prick
Oh eat me up
All that kind of stuff
Yes yo’ mammy wouldn’t wear no drawers
Said, look up bitch, you make me mad
I tell you ’bout the puppies that your sister had
Oh it was a fad
She fucked a hog
She fucked a dog
I know the dirty bitch would fuck a frog
‘Cause yo’ mammy don’t wear no drawers
I went one day
Out to the lake
I seen your mammy
A-fuckin’ a snake
All she tried, she tried to shake
All she shuck, shake on the cake
Mammy don’t wear no drawers

2 Honky Tonk Blues 5:12

Tony [Jackson] used to play these things for what, in the sporting houses, for what they called the naked dances. Of course, they were naked dances all right because they absolutely was stripped. They was stripped. Of course, a naked dance was something that was supposed to be real art in New Orleans. Of course, there were many houses in New Orleans. The District there was considered the second to France, meaning the second greatest in the world, with extensions for blocks and blocks, on one side of the north side of Canal Street, which is supposed to be the highest class, although the highest class district ran from the lowest to the highest, meaning in price and caliber alike. We had a uptown side of the District, which was considered very big, but the price was pretty much even all the way round. And of course they turned out a many different artists in that section, but never the first-class artist because the money wasn ‘t there.

Alan Lomax: What were some of the tunes they used to play down the lower class districts?


Global primary energy use associated with production, consumption and international trade

15% of the energy use embodied in trade turns out to be induced by final consumption, and 85% is attributed to intermediate production https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320445428_Global_primary_energy_use_associated_with_production_consumption_and_international_trade

Steve you say EROI is only relevant to extractive industries I think this paper shows that is not correct. I think you are correct that International Trade is relevant, the relevance economically is relevant at the EROI embodied energy level though. Money in International Trade is a Convenient Posit ( Quine)(*1) What is important regarding that is that the receipt of currency can be exchanged for something tangible, the money receive is not an end in itself. Looked at in EROEI and embodied energy terms it actually makes your point crystal clear. That said its pretty clear to those who are objectively considering the point.

(*1)P.41 para 2. http://letthemconfectsweeterlies.blogspot.se/2018/03/energy-returned-on-energy-invested.html



Thus it is undeniable (and I am surprised to read all those who are torturing themselves trying to deny it) – exports are a cost and imports are a benefit.

Giving some real thing away is a cost. Getting some real thing is a benefit.

That doesn’t equate, as I have been reading the last few weeks, in a conclusion that MMT’s preference is for a nation to have a current account deficit.

It just states the obvious fact that exports, by definition, involve sacrificing real resources and depriving a nation of their use.

Imports on the other hand clearly involve receiving final goods and services where the real resource sacrifice has been made by the exporting nation.

In a world where we produce to consume – not for its own sake – then receiving goods and services is better (real terms) than sending them elsewhere.

Since I was one of the ones denying Mitchell’s opening gambit—though there must have been other people “torturing themselves”, since all I noted in my post was that I disputed it as a premise—I had better reply now on this issue.
I do not deny the proposition that “Giving some real thing away is a cost. Getting some real thing is a benefit”: that’s obvious in a materialist world. What I do deny is that this proposition has any relevance to either macroeconomics or trade theory. And I am not the first one to deny this: that honour goes to Karl Marx.
This raises one of my major issues with MMT: advocates know their own economic logic very well, but they seem to have little knowledge of compatible precursors to their views (or even compatible contemporaries, like complexity theory). Consequently, whether they realise it or not, they often end up making arguments that would be right at home in a conventional Neoclassical textbook. These arguments are just as wrong in MMT hands as they are in Neoclassical ones.
This “exports=cost, imports=benefit” MMT analysis of international trade is a classic case in point. There are at least three ways in which this MMT perspective is a backward step in relation to preceding enlightened work in economics:
  • Standard Neoclassical work on the irrelevance of opportunity cost below full employment
  • Marx’s arguments on the irrelevance of the seller’s utility in trade
  • The extensive Post Keynesian research on declining marginal costs of production and economies of scale.

Inapplicability of opportunity cost except at full employment

The Oligarchical temper, Theophrastus

The Oligarchical temper, Theophrastus


                                             Statue of Theophrastus, Palermo Botanical Garden

John you might enjoy this from this chap.

XXVI. The Oligarch (xxix)

The Oligarchical temper would seem to consist in a love of authority, covetous, not of gain, but of power.

The Oligarch is one who, when the people are deliberating whom they shall associate with the archon as joint directors of the procession, will come forward and express his opinion that these directors ought to have plenary powers; and, if others propose ten, he will say that ‘one is sufficient,’ but that ‘he must be a man.’. Of Homer’s poetry, he has mastered only this line, —
No good comes of a manifold rule; let the ruler be one:
of the rest, he is absolutely ignorant.
Regarding whether The Slog and your erudite and witty observations do any good I suggest that they do. You and I have quite different political pallets and yet you speak for me more often than not. The Kakistocracy is not Left or Right it is Absolute Jackboot in the face, fascist.
From Desiderata.
Go placidly amid the noise and haste,
and remember what peace there may be in silence.
As far as possible without surrender
be on good terms with all persons.
Speak your truth quietly and clearly;
and listen to others,
even the dull and the ignorant;
they too have their story


rogerglewisMay 24, 2018UncategorizedEdit
Post navigation
That hits the spot for me, John, I would on Corbyn make the same points I made regarding a discussion with an old Marxist Chum of mine regarding trump and Saunders.
Joseph Cooper
Joseph Cooper
Those people who want war with Russia for their nationalist expansionist plans would not let Trump stand in their way for one second.
Like · Reply · October 19 at 11:06am
Roger Lewis
Roger Lewis
The point isn´t whether Trump would stand in their way it is whether the leadership from that symbolic position of president, would acknowledge a manifesto from the people along the lines of Sanders suggestion or whether it would be crushed or otherwise sidelined. I suspect in Clinton’s case Crushing and sidelining in equal measure. For trump perhaps it would be one or the other, one or the other is likely to be more effective to the cause of the people than a bit of both as in the long run either a push back or an assisting shove in the right direction at least give feedback. The certainty of more of the same seems inescapable to me with Clinton.
Some oddities in the latest “news”:
CPI inflation fell to 2.4 per cent over the year to April, but Sterling fell by over one cent against the US dollar on the news. Why is inflation now good, when from 1966 to 1997 it was bad?
View original post 1,012 more words