Archive for the 'American Enterprise Institute' Category

Neocons: Traditionalism for me, Globalism for you

October 9, 2007

This is a continuation of the discussion of Lawrence Auster’s traditionalism discussion. See that post and linked ones for references to Auster or Vanishing American.

Neocons at AEI and elsewhere have set up a situation of all the benefits of traditionalism for themselves. They have tenure or strong bargaining power or both. They have extended networks of friends who can help them get jobs or money or resources on an ongoing basis. When they get together with their network it helps them advance in getting money.

This used to be true in traditional societies. You hunted or farmed or fought off invaders or marauders together. Your extended network and your livelihood and defense were all linked together. Every social occasion advanced your personal interests.

For professors, think tank dwellers, journalists, White House staffers or Senators or CEO’s this is still true. They have an extended network that helps them advance themselves. Social networking and business networking are linked. They get self defense from this network against marauders like a crusading assistant US attorney who needs to be reassigned or have their case reassigned.

For the rest of us, the neocons want to take away whatever bits of this are left and deny it to us. They want us globalized. They want our network to disappear. We have the social networking of losers not champions. We can’t help people in our network get jobs, because new jobs are at the level of H-1B wages down to illegal immigrant wages. Social networking with us doesn’t help anymore. There isn’t any need to know extended kin, because they don’t have good jobs to tell us about either.

The good jobs are locked up in the AEI network and aren’t available to the rest of us. So we can only network in fear and commiseration. We can tell each other when we lose our good job, but can’t help the person or give help to find another good job. Those are locked into the AEI network or similar out of reach networks.

The AEI Davos network spends its time taking away the good jobs from the rest of the people. So we are living in fear. Our social and family network can’t help us. They don’t have the resources to help us because the good jobs are disappearing. So they can’t help us find them.

Mitt Romney gained his fortune by working the Bain and Company side of that network. He helped corporate managements in small towns see the light, to ditch the people and get short term profits so they could cash out their options. The result is that traditional family and social networks in America can’t offer help, they are just line ups into the work and reeducation camps the neocons provide us, if that.

Meanwhile the neocons and professors and journalists are living rooted traditional lives. They have permanent jobs and places in their community. They have extended networks that can get them jobs or money or financial opportunities. They get regular opportunities to give papers, op-eds, present at networking gatherings that increase their security and opportunities.

They want traditionalism for them and globalization for us. Their institutions push that as hard as they can. For that they are well paid. Institutions which were supposed to put a break on this are co-opted. The Antitrust Division of the DOJ is effectively controlled by Deputy Assistant Attorney General econ or law profs who approve mergers and takeovers.

The investment banks and corporations doing the deals are then paying them as consultants or their expert witness firms and hiring their students to high paying jobs on Wall Street. That leads to higher salaries for these profs because this is what fuels high tuition, dream job opportunities that come from the former DAAG econ and law profs.

The takeovers and consolidation and approvals have been rubber stamped by a small group of econ prof DAAGs who are parts of the same types of networks discussed above. They have written books together, are on the same journals, are part of a small set of large expert witness firms, etc.

DOJ staff econ Ph.d.’s are the students of these profs. The profs write the letter of recommendation to the current prof who is in charge of the econ Ph.D.’s in DOJ. The prof at DOJ decides which Ph.D.’s to hire. They are then promoted by the prof at DOJ who runs that section. The Economic Analysis Group at DOJ is always run by a prof on loan from a university.

From the time a student enters grad school to the time they retire from DOJ as a Ph.D. economist staffer, their entire career is controlled by the same group of about 10 econ prof DAAGs. This is how its worked for a long time. DOJ doesn’t make it easy to datamine the statistics on this, but one can pull it together from searches.

DOJ Antitrust can’t do any action without an econ Ph.D. signing off on it. That means if the investment banks and management consulting firms can coopt the econ profs who control this system then they can get anything approved. Even the merger of Exxon and Mobil would be approved, and was.

The same system is working to offshore U.S. know-how. Russia, China, India, and other countries analyze this system and get in on it. They are taken care of. The result is that the globalization process happens faster and the rest of us lose out faster.

antitrust expert witness

Most DAAG econ profs are linked to the Handbook of Industrial Organization of Elsevier

Elsevier’s merger with Academic Press was approved in 1999 by DOJ. Daniel Rubinfeld, not DAAG then, later put up an analysis that this violated antitrust laws. That was later taken down.

Elsevier charges huge library subscription fees, unlike the case in the 1960’s. This huge inflation in rates charged libraries was the basis, in part, of Rubinfeld’s analysis.

Some of the analysis is still available:

search Daniel Rubinfeld Elsevier Academic Press

“economic analysis”

“economic analysis” “deputy assistant attorney general”

Wall Street hires the econ undergrad, grad students and law students of these profs. That lets the universities charge high tuition, in part, because dream jobs on Wall Street help fuel high tuition. But dream jobs on Wall Street are fueled by the DOJ Antitrust Division approving mergers and acquisitions. No M and A deal approvals, no M and A profits. M and A is a major driver of profits on Wall Street.

This cozy little world has all the advantages of traditionalism. Everyone knows everyone. Everyone has a permanent place. They have extended networks they have known for decades. Most have multiple jobs and affiliations and multiple pots of money. They have multiple secretaries and support people to smooth their lives. They spend their time in conferences and Davos and other resort meetings. The people who were supposed to be protected instead are losing their jobs.

Men’s median wages are the same as in 1973. Graph page 16:

Income inequality is huge.

“NEW DATA SHOW EXTRAORDINARY JUMP IN INCOME CONCENTRATION IN 2004″ By Aviva Aron-Dine and Isaac Shapiro for a graph of income share of top 1 percent from 1913 to 2004.

Income Inequality U Shape Timeline

7 of the top 8 wealthiest Senators voted for S. 2611, amnesty, affirmative action, non-deportable crime, and a pathway for the top 1 percent of households to continue to enjoy 20 percent of each year’s income, compared to 10 percent before Kennedy’s 1965 Immigration Act. The only 1 of the top 8 who didn’t vote for S. 2611 didn’t vote, Jay Rockefeller. McCain is 7th and Kennedy 8th in wealth.

Open Secrets

Rank Name Minimum Net Worth Maximum Net Worth

1 Herb Kohl (D-Wis) $219,098,029 to $234,549,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

2 John Kerry (D-Mass) $165,741,511 to $235,262,100 Voted Yes S. 2611

3 Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa) $78,150,023 to $101,579,003 Not Voting S. 2611

4 Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif) $43,343,464 to $98,660,021 Voted Yes S. 2611

5 Lincoln D. Chafee (R-RI) $41,153,105 to $64,096,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

6 Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) $38,198,170 to $90,733,019 Voted Yes S. 2611

7 John McCain (R-Ariz) $25,071,142 to $38,043,014 Voted Yes S. 2611

8 Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass) $19,189,049 to $93,043,004 Voted Yes S. 2611

More data here

Free fax to Congress on hot immigration bills:


Mitt Romney is the presidential candidate of this network.

After graduating from Harvard, Romney went to work for the The Boston Consulting Group, where he had interned during the summer of 1974.[15] From 1978 to 1984, Romney was a vice president of Bain & Company, Inc., another Boston-based management consulting firm. In 1984, Romney left Bain & Company to co-found a Bain & Company spin-off private equity investment firm called Bain Capital.[16] During the 14 years he headed the company, Bain Capital’s average annual internal rate of return on realized investments was 113 percent,[17] making money primarily through leveraged buyouts.[18] He invested in or bought many well-known companies such as Staples, Brookstone, Domino’s, Sealy Corporation and The Sports Authority.[19]

In 1990, Romney was asked to return to Bain & Company, which was facing financial collapse. As CEO, Romney managed an effort to restructure the firm’s employee stock-ownership plan, real-estate deals and bank loans, while increasing fiscal transparency. Within a year, he had led Bain & Company through a highly successful turnaround and returned the firm to profitability without layoffs or partner defections.[17]

Romney left Bain Capital in 1998 to head the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games Organizing Committee.[20]

He and his wife have a net worth of between 190 and 250 million USD.[21]

Mitt Romney is a beneficiary of the cozy networks that made possible his fortune. Electing him is putting the fox in charge of the hiring of the DAAG econ profs and law profs who manage the technical work at DOJ.


From Vanishing American

Too often, children have no contact with older people, and the elders are isolated in ’senior communities’ or homes, rarely seeing their grandchildren or other relatives, who live far away.

So we are dwindling away, and fewer of the younger people bother to keep up the extended family ties that were so central to the older generations. Coming to the family reunions and to family holiday celebrations is not a priority with the younger generations.

This isn’t a problem for the elite networks.

William Kristol

William Kristol (born December 23, 1952 in New York City) is an American neoconservative pundit, analyst and strategist. He is the son of Irving Kristol, one of the founders of the neoconservative movement

William Kristol is editor of the influential Washington-based political magazine, The Weekly Standard. Widely recognized as one of the nation’s leading political analysts and commentators, Mr. Kristol regularly appears on Fox News Sunday and on the Fox News Channel.

Mr. Kristol recently co-authored The New York Times bestseller The War Over Iraq: America’s Mission and Saddam’s Tyranny.

This links to

William Kristol is editor of The Weekly Standard, as well as chairman and co-founder of the Project for the New American Century. Before starting the Weekly Standard in 1995, Mr. Kristol led the Project for the Republican Future, where he helped shape the strategy that produced the 1994 Republican congressional victory. Prior to that, Mr. Kristol served as chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle during the first Bush Administration. From 1985 to 1988, he served as chief of staff and counselor to Secretary of Education William Bennett. Prior to coming to Washington, Mr. Kristol served on the faculty of Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government (1983-1985) and the Department of Political Science at the University of Pennsylvania (1979-1983).,2933,2120,00.html

William Kristol is a political contributor for the FOX News Channel (FNC) and serves as a regular contributor to Special Report with Brit Hume, the highest rated political program on cable television.

Irving Kristol

The philisophy of neo-conservatism is two-faced. Its traditionalism for those inside it, and globalization for the rest.

Lawrence Auster discusses Kristol on immigration:

“KRISTOL: I am pro-immigration, and I am even soft on illegal immigration.”

“KRISTOL: And they’ve been contributing to the U.S. economy and not damaging U.S. society. “

“What’s happened that’s so terrible in the last 20 years?”

“as well as his very lucrative speaking career, which by some reports nets him $100,000 to $200,000 per year.”

William Kristol serves on the board of trustees of the Manhattan Institute (paid?)
Bill Kristol, while editor of the Weekly Standard, was paid $100,000 for serving on an Enron advisory board over two years.
Kristol says he does “a fair amount” of speaking to corporate groups and doesn’t normally disclose it.

search William Kristol speaking fees

All those speaking fee gigs are arranged by secretaries at his magazine or at the company or institute. They often provide a private aircraft presumably for himself and whoever he wants to go with him. He may have a lavish suite at a 5 class hotel as part of it and a limo to take him around. He gets treated with caviar traditionalism to say how we should get globalization. He tells CEO’s, take the money, fire the employees. “Take it.” “Take the …” Be an uber-CEO straddling across history like a colossus. While we petty men and women get globalization.

Why, man, he doth bestride the narrow world
Like a Colossus, and we petty men
Walk under his huge legs and peep about
To find ourselves dishonourable graves.
Men at some time are masters of their fates:
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.


AEI for Genetic Replacement Immigration not Mixture

October 5, 2007

The American Enterprise Institute, AEI, supports genetic replacement immigration not mixture immigration. The immigration plan supported by AEI will, with probability one, result in the extinction of all genes in the US at any point in time. This follows from the extension of the Wright Island Model setup to the Immigration Vanishing Survival Theorem setup.

Vanishing American reviews the AEI position that was outlined in a Washington Times article.

“This will arguably be the third great revolution of America, if we can prove that we literally can live without having a dominant European culture.” – Bill Clinton

Actually, its a revolution either way. Its a bigger revolution for the testers if the proposition is proven false. We show below that non-zero annual immigration causes not a mixture but complete genetic replacement. Since genetic replacement is a harsh outcome and takes harsh conditions to achieve, the probability of preserving any type of good culture is very low. To achieve zero genetic survival, conditions have to become harsh enough to induce below replacement fertility on an indefinite basis.

If there is replacement fertility and immigration, the population will grow without bound which is impossible. Thus immigration and a bound on population imply instead fertility is below replacement and this, together with some mild relative survival rate conditions, implies that the survival rates of stock and each year’s cohort of immigrants all go to zero as the horizon recedes. Thus for stock and immigrant cohorts, conditions are harsh.

More from VA:

Who eliminates us, even if they do it ever so gently by encouraging us to blend in with the immigrants who have been picked to replace us, is destroying one unique piece of the human mosaic, which can never be replaced.

We must not let America vanish.

In less than a century, America will no longer be a majority-white nation, David Coleman, professor of Demography at Oxford University, explained Tuesday at a Hudson Institute forum.
A decline in U.S. fertility rates, in combination with increased immigration, will change the ethnic makeup of America, Mr. Coleman said.
This transition is affecting many other countries, Mr. Coleman said. Throughout Western Europe, populations are being inundated by new immigrant populations, he said. The native-born British, Scottish and Irish populations are also becoming minorities in the United Kingdom.

American Enterprise Institute scholar Nicholas Eberstadt said “the United States, for all its flaws, has a pretty workable formula.”

Sustained immigration causes genetic replacement not a mixture as the asymptotic state. The following is from Nagylaki’s paper, see reference below:

“We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.”

The asymptotic state, i.e. long run equilibrium, is not a mixture of the influx and stock gene pool, it is completely the influx gene pool. The assumptions of the Wright Island Model can be relaxed substantially. As long as population is bounded, and there are some mild asymptotic bound conditions, we get the result that each individual gene in the stock at any time goes extinct without daughter genes surviving. This also applies to any set of genes in the stock at any point in time. This is true both as an ex-ante probability and as an ex-post convergence in probability result on the ex-post genetic survival factor.

This applies to each year’s immigrant cohort. Thus America is an asymptotic genetic graveyard. Every year’s genes that come here eventually go extinct. Genes come here to die. It is like the Elephant Graveyard.

== A numerical example shows what happens.

Assume US population at 300 million was the maximum. If people live 75 years, then 4 million die per year. If 2 million enter then births = 4million deaths – 2 million entrants = 2 million.

The ratio of births to deaths is 2/4 or 1/2. The time from birth to parent is roughly 25 years. So in 50 years, one has 1/4, and in 75 years 1/8 of the starting genes.

Even if population went to 450 million, deaths per year are 6 million. With even one million entrants that gives a survival ratio of 5/6. So the number left after 25*n years is (5/6)^n which goes to zero as n goes to infinity.

It goes to zero rapidly in fact.

Population is bounded above. This means that sustained immigration and some mild assumptions on relative survival rates implies that the genetic survival rate of each individual gene, each group of genes, the stock at any point in time, and each year’s immigrant cohort all asymptote to zero. Thus we have rolling genetic extinction. America, and Europe and Canada and Australia and New Zeeland are all genetic graveyards. Every gene that goes to any of them goes extinct.


For the non-technical reader, the discussion in the following article will be easier than the standard literature results. It will still require some work.

You can post questions and eventually I will try to post answers.

Links to academic papers and more discussion:

The graph of declining fertility in the US from 1800 to 1990 is”

Fertility falls except during immigration restriction. This is a combined economics population genetics interaction. Wages are part of this economics genetics combined situation.

The baby boom is when fertility went up. This happened from 1940 to 1957, the period of lowest immigration except for the 1930’s during the Great Depression. Fertility fell from 8 c. 1800 to 3 c. 1920 and then fell to above 2 in the Great Depression and then rose to 3.75 in 1957 and then fell to below 2 by 1980 and recovered slightly to around 2. Part of that is higher immigrant fertility.

The theorems work. Note it was the Mill not the Pill that caused this decline. Info on 19th century wages and working conditions for the Lowell Mill Girls:

Median Wage Increase in constant dollars.Last three decades. Sorted Best-to-Worst.D:Clinton	 565

D:Carter	-108

R:Reagan	-228

R:Bush II	-588

R:Bush I 	-825
R:Ford		-894

Except for Clinton, the median wage has gone down under every President since Ford took office in August 1974.

==Extensive Comment Thread at Front Page Mag Linda Chavez 1.5 mm annual

I posted some of the above information as a comment at Front Page Magazine in a debate involving Linda Chavez. Chavez advocates 1.5 million legal immigrants per year. According to the theorems, this implies genetic replacement of all the stock here on any date, and the entire cohort that comes each year. The Chavez plan is for a rolling genetic extinction. According to her, the economy needs that. It does in fact hold down costs to have people go extinct instead of having replacement children. This is one reason economics papers have such a hard time identifying what is wrong with immigration.

Original article was titled, “The Immigration Debate”.

FP: John Fonte, Mark Krikorian, Linda Chavez, Joe Hicks and Clint Bolick, thank you for joining Frontpage Symposium.

Jamie Glazov is Frontpage Magazine’s managing editor. He holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in U.S. and Canadian foreign policy.

==My comment at Wash Times

“Who cares?” I read Vanishing American’s blog on this.

I care and I am trying to do all I can to stop it. I am for ending all immigration. I support Numbers USA and Fairus and send in my faxes and make the phone calls to my Senators and reps.

The Wright Island Model is a theorem in genetics. It says one way immigration causes complete genetic replacement. Go to link at my name for links to references available on line w/o subscription.

Genetics. 1979 January; 91(1): 163�176.

The Island Model with Stochastic Migration

Thomas Nagylaki

Department of Biophysics and Theoretical Biology, The University of Chicago, 920 East 58th Street, Chicago, Illinois 60637
“We investigated various cases of the island model with stochastic migration. If the population is infinite, the immigrants have a fixed gene frequency and the alleles are neutral, the gene frequency on the island converges to that of the immigrants.”
Posted by Old Atlantic | October 5, 2007 1:24 PM


Mr. Eberstadt said that historically, immigrants in America, over time, are able to assimilate into society and become productive citizens, inferring that the same assimilation process would take place over the next century as immigrants, and their offspring, became the ethnic majority in America.


“This will arguably be the third great revolution of America, if we can prove that we literally can live without having a dominant European culture.” – Bill Clinton

The above proves that we “literally can” not live with sustained immigration. Its a theorem.


We can either extinct together or stop all legal immigration together.

==Appendix Note on VA’s point on difficulty in learning the science.

David Coleman

search Thomas Nagylaki quantum 

If you look at their bios and papers you will see David Coleman has no papers in mathematical biology, they are at a lower level of math.  Nagylaki started in quantum field theory and then switched to mathematical biology.   There is evidently a lack of communication.   These two groups need to communicate more so that Coleman can explain the concepts and math better.  We are not headed towards a mixture state as the long term outcome, we are headed to extinction.  Moreover, this can happen rapidly in some scenarios.

If we want to keep on reading the Nagylaki papers in quantum electrodynamics, we need to start reading and applying the Nagylaki papers in population biology.

%d bloggers like this: