Archive for the 'New Economic School (Moscow)' Category

Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day Stanley Fischer Khan Academy Jumps the Shark

March 29, 2014

On Friday March 14, 2014, Stanford University hosted the SIEPR Economic Summit 2014 Agenda.

This day honored Stanley Fischer and Salmon Khan of Khan Academy.

We can search on these two as search strings in quotes at the same time.

“Stanley Fischer” “Khan Academy”

We can do this search for prior to Jan 1, 2014 so we eliminate some of the results for after SIEPR day itself was announced with these two honorees.

“Stanley Fischer” “Khan Academy” Jan 1 2012 to Jan 1 2014

The result of this is to give hits exclusively to a certain blog.  Some other stray hits arise because of social media feeds that make older pages appear to relate to this content, but that is a reflection of SIEPR day itself and came later.

“Stanley Fischer” “Khan Academy” limited to a certain blog NMDR Jan 1 2012 to Jan 1 2014

We find results like

Stanford Misconduct at NMDR

Kaspersky Red October virus and Aaron Swartz Denial of Service Attack MIT

Several more related posts in January 2013 at NMDR are indexed here

Jan 2013 at NMDR

Stanford Misconduct

Stanford Professor J. Darrell Duffie


And so on.

These relate to discussion of

  1. Possible plagiarism by Stanley Fischer of Nils Hakansson
  2. Possible plagiarism by J. Darrell Duffie using a working paper that extends the Hakansson Merton results in a Stanford Ph.D. thesis of 2000 by Jun Liu.
  3. Russia’s use of these.
  4. That Russia can use these to pressure Duffie, Stanford or Moody’s for ratings benefits.
  5. That other countries can piggy back on this such as Iran or China.

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript”…/19121202.htmlTranslate this page

Dec 19, 2005 – 16.12.2005, Duffie D. Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory (provisional manuscript). 16.12.2005, Pilgrim M. Dive into Python. 16.12.2005, Tan W.M. …

Mexmat is the Department of Mechanics and Mathematics at Moscow State University. Albert Shiryaev is a professor there. He published a book in 1999 on mathematical finance that likely had help from professors in Europe. Shiryaev was in Zurich in 1997 to 1999.  Duffie visited Zurich in 1997.

Iran has since posted the document if it was not already posted.

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript”

At link location


Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript”

And China

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript”


Feb 24, 2008 – 4 posts – ‎4 authors

中译:动态资产定价理论作者:Darrell Duffie 版次:2001 格式:pdf … 附赠:本书手稿,1999. Dynamic Asset Pricing Theory(Provisional Manuscript).

And so on.

The blog NMDR also joined the critique of Khan Academy with hashtag MTT2k

#MTT2k at NMDR

As mentioned above, searches show this blog NMDR was the only place that mentioned Stanley Fischer and Khan Academy in a meaningful way prior to January 1, 2014. It critiqued both Stanley Fischer for plagiarism, Khan Academy and the role of Russia in this.

Sergei Guriev who was at the SIEPR Day worked at New Economic School Moscow and had a Ph.D. in portfolio theory from MIPT, Phys Tech, the university that Peter Kaptisa set up. Kapitsa started Russia’s kompromat on plagiarism in the 1920s and used it to help get atomic secrets.  The universities concealed that from the FBI in the Klaus Fuchs, Edward Corson, and J. Robert Oppenheimer investigations.

So why did Stanford give an award to Khan Academy and Stanley Fischer and so focus attention back to the blog NMDR and these entries on Stanley Fischer and Duffie and Russia’s possible use of their possible plagiarism to get benefits. Those include IMF loans from Stanley Fischer and possibly rating benefits from Moody’s via Duffie and Stanford?

Why would Stanford raise these together and focus attention back to the blog NMDR?

  1. Taunt the blog in some way?
  2. Tell Khan Academy to copy the work on Peano Axioms at the blog NMDR the same way Stanford plagiarized the same person in the Jun Liu thesis under Duffie and the same way that MIT plagiarized Nils Hakansson in the Samuelson and Fischer papers.
  3. Send a message to professors who know of the Stanley Fischer plagiarism not to tell the FBI, Senate or Federal Reserve about it?
  4. Same message to Ph.D.s at Federal Reserve or Federal Reserve Banks or investment banks.  They depend on academic publications for promotion even at Fed Reserve.
  5. Tell the same groups not to provide information to the FBI, Moody’s, Securities Exchange Commission, Senate Banking Committee about the possible pressure on Duffie, Stanford and Moody’s.
  6. Pressure the author of the blog NMDR not to provide information to these.
  7. Mock the Senate Banking Committee as too stupid to figure this out.
  8. Mock the FBI as too stupid to figure this out.
  9. Mock the Department of Justice as too political or too corrupt to proceed in this case.
  10. Mock DOJ and FBI for not having discovered Russia’ use of plagiarism kompromat to get atomic secrets.
  11. Mock DOJ and FBI for not figuring Russia used this to get IMF loans in the 1990s.
  12. Mock DOJ and FBI for being deceived by Harvard and MIT in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay.
  13. Mock DOJ and FBI for being deceived in numerous federal background checks from the Atomic Bomb Project in WWII to the Stanley Fischer nomination.
  14. Mock DOJ and FBI for not understanding that Aaron Swartz may have been trying to use JSTOR to expose some of this.
  15. Mock DOJ and FBI for not understanding that Russia’s warning about Chechens before Boston Bombing was tied to Chechen resentments against Harvard and MIT and Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers over the IMF loans to Russia in the 1990s that funded the Chechen War.
  16. Send a signal to Stanley Fischer that his 100,000 dollar payment from Stanford was for him to use his influence at Federal Reserve to keep Ph.D.s at Federal Reserve from telling this to the FBI or DOJ.
  17. Frighten Russians in the US and UK who are at US universities and even at Federal Reserve not to tell this to the FBI or DOJ.
  18. Tell Stanley Fischer that is his job.
  19. Tell the Fed employees that Stanley Fischer is there to keep them quiet.
  20. Tell professors at universities that Stanley Fischer is controlling this at Fed and they are safe to keep quiet about it and not tell FBI or DOJ.
  21. Tell employees at financial institutions the same.
  22. Tell all of these people that financial institutions can get Mood’s rating benefits the same as Russia for securities they trade or underwrite if they keep the game going.
  23. Tell employees of US government, universities, and investment banks they can get publications, citations, grants, awards, etc. for going along with this and not telling the FBI or DOJ.
  24. Emphasizing that the universities got away with this in US v Harvard, Shleifer and Hay so they can get away with it for the Stanley Fischer nomination.
  25. The best way to convince employees of Federal Reserve Board, universities, Moody’s, investment banks, etc. that they can get away with this and it is safe not to tell the FBI, SEC, FRB, Senate is to mock the abilities of the FBI, SEC, FRB, DOJ, and Senate to uncover this from the 1940s to the present.
  26. SIEPR Day by giving 100k to Stanley Fischer the day after he concealed info on this from Senate Banking Committee and by extension as far as profs know from the FBI and SEC and DOJ mocked them.
  27. By creating the search Khan Academy Stanley Fischer to a webpage that explained it all by someone they know is a victim of this plagiarism, they further mock the FBI, SEC, DOJ and Senate who could contact that person but apparently did not.  This shows to employees of US gov, Moody’s, universities and investment banks that the FBI, DOJ, SEC, and Senate are lazy and apathetic and can’t even do Internet searches or follow up on them.
  28. Over the years the universities, Russian intelligence and others can point out that this has been on Internet for years and FBI, DOJ, SEC, Senate did nothing about it.  That then proves they don’t have to tell them and it won’t do any good to.
  29. SIEPR Day itself and the Stanley Fischer Khan Academy are intended to be used by Stanford, MIT, Harvard, the investment banks, and Russian and Chinese intelligence to show them years from now when the FBI, DOJ, SEC, Senate have still done nothing and Stanley Fischer is appointed that they are paper tigers who can be ignored and it does no good to tell them anyhow.
  30. Thus the NMDR pages exposing Duffie, Stanford, Moody’s, MIT, Harvard, Russian intelligence, etc. do not hurt them but actually help Stanford et al.  This is why Stanford created the search link to the NDMR pages precisely so they can prove to the witnesses that it is safe to conceal this from FBI and deceive them if questioned and that it will achieve nothing to tell them, except that the person who does will have their career harmed as happened to the NDMR blogger and to Nils Hakansson.

Given that the SIEPR Day was the day after Stanley Fischer concealed information on all of this from the Senate Banking Committee, the public, Moody’s and anyone watching from SEC, we can infer that it was not targeted at the blogger NMDR or Khan Academy but to those who could provide information to the FBI and DOJ, in and out of government, to keep quiet and that it was safe to do so.

Stanford wanted to tell Federal Reserve employees that despite the Stanley Fischer plagiarism and Russia’s use of it being on the Internet since 2006 and the Duffie and Moody’s explained since 2012 and the Russian document since 2005, that the FBI and DOJ could continue to be fooled on these matters into the future and everyone who went along would profit.  They also point out that the blogger NDMR who exposed this was not getting rewarded and the same would happen to anyone who spoke up as to NMDR. Furthermore, if they spoke up, the FBI and DOJ would ignore them anyhow, so they would lose their career and the DOJ, FBI and SEC would do nothing about it anyhow.

Stanford thus intended to delay, impede or obstruct witnesses on all these matters from coming forward to the FBI, DOJ, SEC, and Senate Banking Committees.  This was an act of Stanford not of the individual professor J. Darrell Duffie who does not even run SIEPR.  That also sends the message to all these people that the coverup is bigger than Duffie it is institutional to Stanford and all the Stanford faculty who know of this stand behind the obstruction.  This is a hypothesis.

Note this also comes with the crisis with Russia which started with the Boston Bombing, the firing of CIA agents who reported to Stanford Professor Michael McFaul while ambassador to Russia in 2013 and the Ukraine and Crimea crises.  McFaul was appointed ambassador from Stanford in 2011. The Duffie document was already posted by Russia in 2006. Stanford failed to tell that to the Senate in McFaul’s confirmation or to the FBI in the McFaul background check.


Moody’s rates tens of trillions of dollars of securities. If Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Princeton, Cornell, University of Chicago, Elsevier Science, Moody’s and related investment banks are found liable for losses of systematic good ratings, then they would all go bankrupt.  They would be ruined and likely the individual professors as well in investor lawsuits.

The above is hypotheses and speculation.  Please restate as questions.  All other disclaimers apply.  This is draft and preliminary. Comments and corrections are welcome.  This is subject to revision.  Please include the disclaimers in any reference to this page.


Sergei Guriev New Economic School Moscow Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day

March 26, 2014

Stanley Fischer testified to the Senate Banking Committee on March 13, 2014. He did not disclose that he plagiarized his Ph.D. at MIT in 1969, that he has prevented Nils Hakansson his victim from getting recognition, and that Russia knew that during the 1990s when he was in control of IMF loans to Russia at the IMF.

The following day, March 14, 2014, Stanford SIEPR paid Fischer 100,000 dollars as an award but in effect for concealing information from the public and the Securities Exchange Commission.  Stanford is potentially liable for lawsuits arising from credit misratings at Moody’s on Russian government bonds and on securities issued or traded by its partner financial institutions including Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley.  This could amount to billions or even trillions of dollars of liability to Stanford, MIT and these institutions.

Sergei Guriev was one of the speakers at Stanford SIEPR Agenda Day.  Guriev’s background indicates he likely was involved in analyzing the plagiarism by Stanley Fischer in the 1990s as well as in that by Stanford Professor J. Darrell Duffie now chairman of the MIS Committee of Moody’s that oversees the ratings of all financial securities in the world.  This exceeds 50 trillion dollars.

Moody’s threatened to downgrade the credit rating of the United States in September 2012 while Russia had this leverage on Duffie, Stanford and Moody’s.  Russia Today gleefully reports this.

Russia had this leverage over the US government credit rating and that of other US financial institutions.  Sergei Guriev at the time was Rector of the New Economic School in Moscow that helps the Russian government do kompromat plagiarism analysis on Duffie, Stanford, Stanley Fischer, MIT, etc.

Sergei Guriev of the New Economic School Moscow and of Paris Science Po.

1993 – 1994 Russian Academy of Science, Postgraduate Studies Degree: Ph.D. (Candidate of Science) in Physics and Math Thesis: “Some Mathematical Models of Saving and Investment”

Russia used kompromat on Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers via his uncle Paul Samuelson to get IMF loans in the 1990s. This thesis topic is on that same subject.

Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology (MIPT)
Department of Management and Applied Mathematics
(6 year program)

MIPT was founded by Peter Kapitsa who invented the method of academic plagiarism kompromat for Russia in the 1920s. This was used to help get atomic secrets. The Max Born Spy Ring and in effect the Kapitsa Spy Ring was part of this effort. Stanford, MIT, Harvard, Cornell, Princeton, Chicago concealed info from the FBI about the Fock Letter about Corson during the FBI investigation of Edward M. Corson following the confession of Klaus Fuchs, a close friend of Corson. Corson, Fuchs, and Peierls worked for a time on separation methods for uranium during WWII in the U.S. Peierls was also investigated and the universities kept the Fock Letter and plagiarism kompromat secret from the FBI and MI5 during this investigation.

Sergei Guriev, Visiting Professor, Sciences Po in Paris; Professor of Economics, New Economic School in Moscow.  ” Lunch Remarks: The State of the Russian Economy

” In 1997-98, Dr. Guriev visited the Department of Economics at M.I.T. for a one-year post-doctoral placement”

This is when Russia was using plagiarism kompromat on Stanley Fischer and Larry Summers, nephew of Paul Samuelson and Kenneth Arrow to get IMF loans.  Guriev’s thesis was on the same topic as the plagiarism by Stanley Fischer and Paul Samuelson.

He was a Morgan Stanley Professor of Economics and a Rector at the New Economic School (NES) in Moscow until he resigned on 30 April 2013 and fled to France.[1] He joined NES in 1998 focusing on research and teaching and became a full-time permanent faculty member in 1999. He became the school’s Rector in 2004.

Note at Stanford, at NES Moscow Guriev is still considered employed at NES Moscow.

Guriev interview June 2013 Der Spiegel


In a SPIEGEL interview, prominent Russian economist and former government adviser Sergei Guriev discusses the Kremlin’s retaliation campaign against the opposition and why he recently fled to France.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Guriev, why did you flee to France?



Guriev: I was under pressure for months. My wife had already predicted this development three years ago, despite the political thaw under then-President and current Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev. She didn’t want our children to grow up in a country without freedom, so she decided to move to Paris. I, on the other hand, was still hopeful.

SPIEGEL: At the time, you were part of a small group of people who shaped Medvedev’s economic policy. When did you decide to flee?

Guriev: The turning point came in late April, when investigators turned up at my office with a search warrant and seized all of my email correspondence since 2008 — 45 gigabytes.

SPIEGEL: That’s the Siberian city near the Chinese border where oil magnate Mikhail Khodorkovsky was held in a prison camp for many years. You are now accused of having been paid by Khodorkovsky to prepare an expert report that recommends his release.

Guriev: That’s ridiculous. In 2003, Moscow’s New Economic School (NES) received $50,000 (€37,500) from a partner of Khodorkovsky’s. I didn’t receive a single kopek of that money. I was a visiting professor at Princeton University at the time, and only a year later did I become the rector at NES. Besides, I prepared the expert report in 2011 for then-President Medvedev, together with colleagues.

SPIEGEL: How is the New Economic School funded?

Guriev: We are a private university. We derive our funding from tuition and donations from Russia and abroad.

SPIEGEL: Of course the Kremlin doesn’t like that. Are you disappointed that Medvedev couldn’t or wouldn’t protect you?

Guriev: I prefer not to comment on that. He’s in a difficult situation. No one seems to mention the modernization he promised anymore. (President) Vladimir Putin decides everything.

SPIEGEL: Sergey Markov, a political scientist with ties to the Kremlin, has practically accused you of treason because of your ideas on the privatization of state-owned companies, which Medvedev took up, and he has described you as the intellectual center of the opposition to Putin. Do you intend to overthrow Putin?

Guriev: Of course not. I’m an academic, not a politician.


(Note while looking at NES webpages, Firefox started to take up a huge amount of time, likely coincidence, since that problem manifests at other times as well.)

New Economic School,
Suite 1721, Nakhimovskii Prospekt 47,
117418, Moscow, Russia
(This is a short walk from the metro station Profsoyuznaya (orange line). You exit from the front of the train if you are coming from the center and then take two left turns before exiting the metro. We are located in the CEMI building)



Simeon Djankov, Professor, NES


The governing body of the School is the Board of Directors. The Board meets bimonthly to make strategic and operational decisions. Presently, the Board of Directors includes:



Notice the President of NES is also Director of CEMI.  NES is in the CEMI building.  CEMI is a state funded entity from the Soviet Union.

In 1985, the year of Perestroika, he took up his current position as the Director of the Central Economics and Mathematical Institute in Moscow.

Valery Makarov was at one of the conferences in Poland in the 1970s to put pressure on American profs using Paul Samuelson plagiarism kompromat to get nominations for the Nobel Prize in econ for Kantorovich of the USSR.  Stanley Fischer plagiarism was part of that.

Later plagiarism by Darrell Duffie at Stanford putting a paper on dynamic programming into a Stanford Ph.D. thesis was a continuation of the same subject.

Sergei Guriev was at New Economic School, when Russia posted the Duffie document that is evidence of his plagiarism.

Duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript”

This 1999 unpublished manuscript contains a citation to the paper copied in the Stanford thesis in 2000.  It shows Duffie had the paper that was copied and so is evidence of his plagiarism.

Duffie is a member of SIEPR.

Victor Polterovich is another example of overlap of CEMI and NES.

Head of Laboratory, Central Economics and Mathematics Institute
(CEMI), Russian Academy of Sciences;

Professor, Chairman of Academic Committee,
New Economic School (NES), Moscow.

Guriev allowed Der Spiegel to be deceived that NES was in opposition to the Russian government of Putin. In fact, NES is in the CEMI building, the same person is head of both, and the same people have done kompromat analysis on profs in the US and UK since the 1970s.

Sergei Guriev — the former rector of Moscow’s New Economic School who fled to Paris in April — was also quick to comment on the news. “Khodorkovsky was released because Russia’s image has continuously deteriorated lately,” he said. There has been widespread speculation that Guriev will also be charged in a third trial against the oligarch.

Der Spiegel seems to work with Guriev to burnish his credibility as a Kremlin dissident.  But as we saw above with NES, CEMI, this involves deception of the readers.


Stanford seems to have provided material assistance to Russia at the SIEPR Agenda Day for Stanley Fischer.  There is an NES graduate at the Federal Reserve Board in Washington D.C.  They are likely afraid she will spill the beans to the FBI and Senate Banking Committee and the Securities Exchange Commission about  Stanley Fischer, MIT, Stanford, Duffie, and the role that NES plays in this.

Darrell Duffie is head of the MIS Committee of Moody’s which oversees ratings of financial securities including the bonds of Russia.

Director since October 2008

Darrell Duffie, Ph.D., age 59, is Chairman of the MIS Committee and is a member of the Audit and Governance and Compensation Committees of the Board of Directors. He is the Dean Witter Distinguished Professor of Finance at Stanford University Graduate School of Business and has been on the finance faculty at Stanford since receiving his Ph.D. from Stanford in 1984. He has authored books and research articles on topics in finance and related fields. Dr. Duffie is a member of The Federal Reserve Bank of New York Financial Advisory Roundtable, and the Board of The Pacific Institute of Mathematical Sciences and is a Fellow and member of the Council of the Econometric Society and a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences. He is Chairman of the Market Participants Group on Reference Rate Reform.  Dr. Duffie served as a trustee of iShares Trust and a director of iShares, Inc. from 2008 to 2011 and was President of the American Finance Association in 2009.

Holdings: 23,307 shares

Stanford has been requested to investigate this and to notify Moody’s, Securities Exchange Commission, Federal Reserve Board, Senate Banking Committee and FBI.  So far they have not replied to these requests.

Obama spoke at NES Moscow in 2009.

Stanford Professor Michael McFaul was US ambassador to Russia and spoke at NES Moscow in 2012.

The Duffie provisional manuscript was posted on the Internet in 2005 and so was posted at the time of these speeches. Stanford Professor Darrell Duffie was head of the MIS Committee at the time of the McFaul speech in 2012 and thus had control of the credit ratings of Russia and the US government.

As stated, a former NES person is at the Federal Reserve Board in Washington. That person could blow the whistle on all of them.  This is why they have to appoint Stanley Fischer Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. This is why Stanford at SIEPR Agenda Day paid Stanley Fischer 100,000 for concealing information on this from the Senate Banking Committee and the Securities Exchange Commission as well as the Federal Reserve Board and the FBI.

duffie “dynamic asset pricing theory” “provisional manuscript”

The above is draft and preliminary.  Comments and corrections welcome. The above is hypotheses and speculation on issues of public interest.  Please restate as questions.  All other disclaimers apply.






Milton Friedman Lost Witness on Russia’s Plagiarism Files

November 16, 2006

“SAN FRANCISCO — Milton Friedman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist who advocated an unfettered free market and had the ear of three U.S. presidents, died Thursday at age 94.”

Questions Friedman might have answered on Russia’s Plagiarism Files and use of plagiarism.

1. Was Koopmans a communist or spy?

2. Was there plagiarism involving Andrew D. Roy a victim in 1952 at U Chicago. Was Roy work being given to Markowitz?

3. Was Milton Friedman the one who told Alfred Cowles this was happening?

4. Is that why Cowles had the Managing Editor of Econmetrica resign and move the editorial office to Northwestern?

5. Was pressure used by the Soviets on plagiarism to get nominations for Kantorovich and Koopmans for the 1975 Nobel Prize 1 year ahead of Friedman.

6. Why did Friedman have a feud with Koopmans that he was still writing about in his 1998 autobio.

7. This was written about in a recent book by Martin J. Beckman who was at Cowles Commission around 1952. Beckman takes the side of Koopmans, who is dead. Why are Friedman and Beckmann still fighting this in 1998 and the 2000’s? Is it because Russia used this to pressure low interest rate loans in the 1990’s from Stanley Fischer at IMF and Larry Summers at Treasury, a nephew of Arrow and Samuelson?

8. Stanley Fischer was hired at UChicago in 1969 from MIT. Did they think he had plagiarized Nils Hakansson?

9. Did Richard Posner as a U Chicago prof know of this in the 1970’s?

10. Was Eric Posner given tenure at U Chicago in 1998 as an attempt to influence Judge Posner not to tell this to the FBI or USAO Mass? (speculation of course)

11. Did Russia use pressure to get IMF loans in the 1990’s based on this?

12. Was this info passed to the US Supreme Court during Bush v. Gore to influence the vote against Gore? (this would be hearsay from Friedman)

13. Did they know in the 1950’s that Russia had used plagiarism to help get Klaus Fuchs into Los Alamos and to pressure Niels Bohr to try to influence Churchill and Roosevelt to give the bomb secret to the Soviets?

14. Did Paul A. Samuelson on the Council of the Econometric Society in 1952 know the true story about the Managing Editor of Economerica resigning, along with the editorial Secretary, and the editorial office being moved?

15. Harry Markowitz didn’t receive his Ph.D. until Sep 1955 Quarter, the first date after the Cowles Commission left University of Chicago in July 1955. Was this because Alfred Cowles wouldn’t let Markowitz get his Ph.D.? Or was it someone at Cowles like Koopmans?
Above is speculation not assertions.

16. Markowitz admitted that he didn’t do the formulas of “algebraic simplicity” and “wide acclaim” taught to MBA students and in textbooks in 1987, 3 years before he got the Nobel Prize with the press release using exactly those words. Why did the Press Release use these words? Why are MBA students taught that Markowitz did those formulas and not Roy when Markowitz himself admits Roy did them and that he Markowitz did not?

17. Markowitz thanks Kenneth Arrow in 1955 for giving him the idea of what his thesis at UChicago was, an algorithm for mean variance optimization with short sale constraints. Wolfe did this too at about the same time. These were published in the Naval Research Logistics Quarterly c. 1956. Jacob Wolfowitz, also published in that journal.

18. The Markowitz article was published in March 1952 in Journal of Finance, a second rate journal edited at U Chicago business school. This Markowitz article contained no important formulas as results, just a graph to illustrate mean variance choice with short sale constraints. There is no formula even today for that, just an algorithm. The Roy article was published in July 1952 in Econometrica, the top journal in econ, in July 1952. Econometrica was also edited at U Chicago, in effect by the Cowles Commission. The Roy article did mean variance choice without short sale constrainst and got the formula solutions taught to MBA’s and in textbooks today that are credited to Markowitz. Jacob Wolfowitz wrote the article after Roy’s in the July 1952 issue. Did Wolfowitz know why the managing editor resigned?

19. Did Jacob Wolfowitz tell this to Paul Wolfowitz before Jacob died in 1981?

20. There are many ties from Jacob Wolfowitz to MIT econ in 1969, the year that Robert C. Merton, Paul A. Samuelson, and Stanley Fischer duplicated in part the 1966 UCLA thesis of Hakansson. These include Robert Engle, Robert Solow, and others. Search on Jacob Wolfowitz in the Nobel Prize site.

21. Did Valery Makarov put pressure on US profs at the 1972 Warsaw economics conference? Attendees included Martin Weitzman, then at MIT, now at Harvard, William A. Brock, Martin J. Beckmann and othes.

These are questions, speculation, hypotheses or opinion. All other disclaimers apply.


=Note added

Some earlier Cowles papers by Markowitz are now available on line.  The above has to be revised in light of these.

In particular,

CCDP Economics 278, “Towards a Theory of Financial Behavior” (plus Errata) [15pp] (May 1950)
CCDP Economics 294, “Investment Company Behavior Equations” [7pp] (October 1950)
CCDP Economics 295, “On the Certainty Equivalence and Risk Discount Hypotheses” [16pp] (November 1950)



read more | digg story

Larry Summers joins DE Shaw as MD

October 21, 2006

Washington Post reports that Larry Summers is joining hedge fund DE Shaw as a managing director.

Speculation on whether Russia used academic kompromat to pressure low interest rate loans in the 1990’s from Fischer and Summers was posted at Washington Post.

The following is speculation. Larry Summers and Stanley Fischer arranged billions in low interest rate loans for Russia in the 1990’s. Boris Berezovsky was the main oligarch for Russia. He had a Ph. D. in math from Moscow State University and was a manager at the Institute of Control Sciences.

There were incidents at UChicago in 1952 and MIT in 1969. The latter involving Fischer and Samuelson the uncle of Summers. There was a conference in Warsaw in 1972, where Makarov of USSR may have put pressure on US profs, some still alive, for Arrow and Samuelson, uncles of Summers to nominate Kantorovich for the Nobel Prize in economics in 1975. This was part of a larger history by Russia to use such methods starting in 1925.

Russia may have used this again in the 1990’s to pressure loans from Summers and Fischer from IMF and then use those for loans for shares. LTCM may have realized this and traded Russian government bonds. The USAO Mass investigated Harvard starting in 1997. All of the above may have been concealed from it.

Jacob Wolfowitz, Paul’s father knew of incidents up to 1981. Paul may have used this to get the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998 during the USAO Mass investigation, and hearings on LTCM bailout and loans to Russia.

Yoo or others may have passed this to Silberman to Scalia during Bush v. Gore and used it against Gore. Above is speculation.

See following for more information.

Russia Used Plagiarism Files to Gain atomic know-how.

The above has a detailed analysis of texts in physics in quantum mechanics on whether Dirac and Fowler plagiarized Max Born and Pascual Jordan and then whether Kapitza knew it and Russia used that to help pressure Niels Bohr in 1944 to advocate to turn over atomic know how to Russia. In a meeting with Churchill after Bohr got a letter from Kapitza at the Soviet embassy in London, Churchill got very angry. Lindemann, Churchill’s scientific adviser likely told him the details. Kapitza had published an obit of Rutherford in 1937 coyly implying that there had been plagiarism at Cavendish Lab. Fowler was Rutherford’s son in law and was involved.

Russia’s Plagiarism Files: Summaries and links

The Washington Post: A Wikipedia Of Secrets

This starts with the 1925 incident and reviews quickly the possible use for atomic know how spying by Russia and also China. It covers in detail, including internet searches the 1969 MIT incidents where Summers’ uncle, Paul Samuelson duplicated in part the work of a 1966 UCLA thesis received at MIT in 1966 by Prof Karl Shell who chaired a session at which it was presented by its author Nils Hakansson. Hakansson also presented his paper at Harvard in early 1969. Hakansson was on faculty with Yale from 1967 with Stiglitz who edited the first two volume of Samuelson’s papers.

A paper extending this to uncertain lives was submitted by Hakansson from Yale to a journal and published in 1969. A similar chapter appeared in Stanley Fischer’s thesis in 1969 without citation. Fischer later cited the Hakansson paper in a 1972 publication. This article then continues to discuss briefly India and Pakistan’s potential knowledge of this entire history starting with Bhabha at Cambridge England in 1927.

The PM of India gave a speech at Moscow State University in 2005 name dropping many of those involved in the physics and econ cases, including Kapitza and Kantorovich.

More on loans to Russia, US v. Harvard, etc.

David Warsh at has extensive materials on the Harvard case but not these other issues of plagiarism, etc.

A recent summary is

The Light Gray Curse

Note that Warsh suggests the possibility of kompromat but doesn’t discuss what it might be. Warsh also doesn’t depart from, although he doesn’t uphold either, the standard story of the 1990’s that professors from Harvard, MIT, and University of Chicago took over and ran Russia and that Russian intelligence accepted that meekly. I.e. at the same time as they were running Aldrich Ames (tried 1994) and Robert P. Hanssen (arrested 2001) and finding moles in Russian intelligence, they also accepted with meekness that these profs would control and run Russia is the standard history.

The standard history, i.e. from Harvard and the government, is that Russian intelligence, which used profs like Klaus Fuchs and Bruno Pontecorvo to get the secret of the atom bomb, had no files on academia in the US, including unouted communists or spies, and simply accepted meekly that Harvard profs would run Russia. Warsh doesn’t say he acceps such a fairy tail, but he doesn’t go beyond suggesting the possibility of kompromat either.

Note that in 1994, Sudoplatov published a book accusing J. Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi and Szilard of being quasi agents by going along with Russian intelligence activities. The US profs in physics reacted with fury and were on PBS’s The News Hour to denounce this book. Sudoplatov was retired in Moscow. He had been a top Soviet spy in WWII. He was responsible for the execution of Leon Trotsky in Mexico.

Yet according to Harvard econ dept, etc. Russian intelligence meekly accepted Harvard econ profs like Shleifer, Summers and Fischer taking over and running Russia. According to Harvard econ dept, Russian intelligence despite its great successes simply accepted that Harvard econ dept would run Russia from the HIID grant and from IMF (Stanley Fischer) and US Treasury (Larry Summers). Harvard econ in effect said to the USAO Mass that Russian intelligence never made any attempt to use any files it might have to influence Summers, Fischer and Shleifer but just let them take over Russia without doing anything to stop it. According to Harvard econ, Russian intelligence meekly accepted that Shleifer, Summers and Fischer would run Russia while at the same time it was running as spies Aldrich Ames, a high level agent in US CIA’s counter-intelligence and Robert P. Hanssen a high level US operative in counter-intelligence, both against Russia.

2 Former Treasury Chiefs Add Clout to Hedge Funds”
By Lori Montgomery
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, October 21, 2006; Page D01

Comment page link is here.
All other disclaimers apply.

%d bloggers like this: