Wednesday, July 29, 2015


The Greek Legislators Overspending Crisis has shown the world something that few politicians from the various countries of Europe want to acknowledge. It's time to end  the Euro zone and as importantly, end the EU. Everyone knows this but politicians and the simple-minded who depend on politicians to eat.

This is what should happen:

  1. The Germans should exit the Euro and the EU and then create the new Mark zone and the new Hanseatic League.
  2. The British should exit the EU. 
  3. The Irish should exit the Euro and the EU and then the British and Irish should create the new Pound zone and the new Commonwealth.
  4. The French and Italians should form the new Euro, call it the lira/livre and create the new Roman Europe.
  5. Belgium should break up into Walloonia and Flanders.
  6. South Tyrol should revert to Austria.
The Deutsche should create the new Mark zone. The countries joining the Deutsche in new Mark zone should be: Austria, Nederlands, Czech Republic, Finland, Estonia, and Belgian Flanders along with maybe Slovakia and Slovenia.

The new Hanseatic League should incorporate Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Poland and Switzerland. It could incorporate Latvia, Lithuania, and Hungary. The new Hanesatic League ought to work out trade deals with the new Pound Commonwealth as well as with the Russian-Belarus Trading bloc.

The French and Italians should form the new lira/livre and new United Roman Europe. The countries joining the French and Italians in new lira/livre zone and New Roman Europe should be: Spain, Portugal, Greece, Malta and the new Belgian Wallonia.

The British ought to do what is in their best interest, revive their commonwealth and in so doing, entering in reciprocity trade agreements (wrongly and deceptively called "free trade") with the Americans, Canadians, Kiwi, Australians, and Hindians.

The foregoing would truly fix Europe for Europeans and better the world.

The idea of the EU itself arose from unscientific, superstitious thinking from the late 1940s to 1970s (see: the Schuman Declaration). The EU is as antiquated as the United Nations is.

By the time the EU coalesced, globalization was underway. The EU was obsolete before the ink dried on the signed documents.

Gauls, other Latin Europeans and the Greeks think differently from Germanic Europeans. The former are fooling themselves if they can ever be the latter.

The difference between the Gallo-Latins along with the Greeks to the Germanics is alike to the difference between helpless school children and axe-wielding warrior men, between the effeminate and the manly, between those who teach because they can't do and those who can do, between socialists and individualists.

Read more ...
Blogger Tricks

Monday, July 27, 2015


On Friday, July 24, 2015, a popular blogger cut and pasted a story from Bloomberg about hedge funds betting on a decline in gold prices, a first for hedgers.

In the Disqus comments, a comment by a guy named Doug Eberhardt caught my eye. That Doug Eberhardt seems to be the same Doug Eberhardt who writes gold and silver blog and who has written a book.

So in the comments, Doug claimed this:
Gold maintains its purchasing power over time. Silver too. Speaking of real rate of return, how about 51 years ago and how a quarter could buy you a gallon of gas and today that same quarter exchanged for the "scrip of the day" can still buy you a gallon of gas in most states except the left coast (up until a few weeks ago) at $2.65. Meanwhile a 1965 quarter can buy you 25 cents worth of gas today. 
Not one to believe anyone's boldface claims and already knowing that against many things, gold has lost buying power, I decided to look up Doug's claim about gasoline. The facts easily refute Doug's claim.

According to the DOE, the average price of a gallon of gasoline in the USA in both 1964 and 1965 was 30¢. At face value, a 1932-64 Washington quarter has been quoted to sell at $2.6566 (the quoted price on July 25 , 2015).

So in either 1964 or 1965, at face value, it would take 1.2 quarters to buy a gallon of gasoline.

Today, in all other states, except Washington, Nevada, Hawaii, Alaska and California, you could buy more gasoline with that same coin first sold to coin collectors than you could with that coin at face value in 1965. However, in Washington, Nevada, Hawaii, Alaska and California, every 1932-1964 quarter lost buying power with respect to a gallon of gasoline purchase. 

It never dawned on Doug that rather than any 1932-64 quarter keeping its buying power, oil production and refining become more efficient since 1965 thus letting sellers accept lower winning bids.

All should note there are storage, discovery and transaction costs associated with holding coins, finding buyers and transferring property as well as possession of the coins for today's legal tender. So the net gain anyone gets for selling gold or silver spot will be less than the spot price times quantity. It is this net gain that counts.

Also, if everyone rushed to sell his collection of 1932-64 quarters, the price for those quarters would fall. That said, nothing would preclude anyone from melting his coins, illegally of course, extracting the silver and selling that silver spot. As well, there are costs associated with smelting that would reduce the net gain upon sell.

After I presented Doug the facts, Doug accused me of being a nitpicker. Ironically, by his doing so, Doug revealed himself as one doing nitpicking. What Doug believes is nitpicking is what I call  prudent businessman reckoning.

After which, Doug engaged in a bit of ad hominem by writing, "Smack, if you knew anything about this industry, people don't rush out to sell their 90% silver quarters and dimes, they hoard them."

Of course, I never made any claims about what anyone actually does. However,  if people hoard their silver quarters and dimes, as Doug claims they do, what is the point of holding silver coins at all? Doing so is like hoarding a 1980s VHS porn collection or a collection of 1960s TOPPS baseball cards.

Doug then asked as if he believed he had something, "Did they [hoarders] rush out and sell them when silver as $49.50 an ounce in 2011? No."

Of course, stupidly, anyone who hoarded, lost out. Being paper rich is useless.

Like Bitcoin collectors, Doug seems to miss why anyone buys collectibles. If anyone sold his silver-laden coins at the top in 2011, he would have bought cash or other bank credit denominated in dollars. At day's end, collectibles are worthless until sold and what people want when they sell their collectibles is cash or other bank credit denominated in dollars.

Of course, Doug's beloved hoarders could spend their silver-laden coins for everyday products right now. However, they could only get 25¢ of buying power for each quarter, regardless of silver content.

Doug's livelihood seems to be tied into price appreciation for gold and silver. In the comments, Doug made this boldface claim: Gold maintains its purchasing power over time. Silver too.

Yet, I have shown many cases where Doug's claim is quite false. You can see proof in charts that Doug's claim is false: 
So, after being showed facts vs his mere claims, seemingly agitated, Doug began a campaign of bragging and more ad hominem  — "Smack, I'll put my reputation on the line of understanding this market better than you or anyone else...... Congress ... asked me to testify before them in 2010." Further, Doug accused me of committed the fallacy of the strawman argument.

Comparing gold and the S&P 500 isn't a strawman. Doug doesn't seem to understand what the strawman fallacy is.

Doug's position is this: "[G]old and silver hold their purchasing power over time."

My refutation of his position is direct: Against many things, gold has lost buying power. For my argument to have been a strawman, I would needed to have argued something like this:
You say, gold and silver hold their purchasing power over time. But I say, so what! FDR banned gold ownership with Executive Order 6102. You could buy gold today and have the government take it tomorrow.
Doug made this boldface claim: "Gold maintains its purchasing power over time. Silver too."  For his claim to be true, there could be no instances where gold and silver lose purchasing power against other commodities, other products and other vehicles of speculation.

The S&P 500 is one such vehicle of speculation. Gold has done poorly against the S&P 500.

As anyone can buy a share of the S&P 500, for your claim to be true, someone with gold would have needed at least to buy the same number of shares of the S&P 500 today as he could have done so many years ago.

From Q3 1976 to Q3 2011, True Gold grew at less than 1% a year, coming in at a scant 0.5% a year for a total of 19.6%, from $87.11 to $104.18. In the same period, True S&P 500 grew almost 4 times as fast, albeit at 1.8% a year for a total of 95%, from $78.12 to $152.33.

All can enjoy the facts right here on Bizarro Theater: IS THERE EVER REASON TO BUY GOLD?

As anyone can buy a share of the S&P 500, for Doug's claim to be true, someone with gold would have needed at least to buy the same number of shares of the S&P 500 today as he could have done so many years ago.

The exact opposite has happened. It has taken ever fewer shares of the S&P 500 to buy the same weight of gold. Said another way, it has taken ever more gold to buy one share of the S&P 500. In short, gold has lost buying power to the S&P 500 as it has to many things.

Against many uniform contract commodities, gold has lost buying power. Such comparisons are valid. Since demonetization, against many things, gold has lost its buying power.

If Doug believes his claim, he doesn't understand the reality of commerce. If Doug doesn't believe his claim but says it to get others to buy from him, Doug uses questionable business practices. 

Gold and silver have been demonetized. The price of gold, the price for silver as well as anything else conforms to the one, true, infrangible law that governs all of commerce, the Law of Prices.

The Law of Prices holds the winning bids of purchase and sale in the face of what is on offer sets the price. Unlike man-made law, this law is inescapable.

Back in 2014, I showed readers of Bizarro Theater the future of gold. If you have not done so, you should read this: LOSING ITS LUSTER. THE SECRET FUTURE OF GOLD REVEALED.

Under the current state of the economy, bank credit and interest rates, the time to buy gold long has long gone. There are no drivers to buy gold. None.

Doug's livelihood seems to be tied into price appreciation for gold and silver. Doug said, "All my company sells are bullion coins as opposed to all other gold dealers," which seems that Doug is in the business of selling rounds. Selling gold rounds is a business predicated on finding buyers who believe people like Doug and who hope for a rise in the price of gold.

The worst bit are all the gold and silver hucksters preying upon gullible who suffer from end times delusions and thus feel compelled to become preppers for a future. It never dawns on them that if there would be worldwide financial collapse and reversion to money — coined metal by weight and fineness — even a small weight of gold and silver would make anyone rich.

Under total collapse, there won't be credit. Without credit, there won't be massive edifices of capital. Without capital there won't be products or wages.

It will take little gold to buy much of the few things that can be had.


Today, 7/28/2015. a day after I wrote the above work, Doug couldn't resist himself. At the end of debate, one day ago, Doug wrote:
"I'll give you the last word and ignore you as you have your own agenda."
Doug lashed out recklessly, engaging in ad hominem. Some of Doug's gems were these:

  • "You wouldn't make a good attorney."
  • "I have now classified you as a troll who sits in their underwear at his computer and has nothing better to do with their time."
  • "Next you used a strawman to make a point in bringing up the S&P 500 and not sticking with the 'issue.'"
  • "#troll"
It seems Doug has stewed on everything I've written and having become enraged, Doug had to lash out it what seems to be little more than a childish tantrum. 

And yet, Doug Eberhardt wants adults to enter into purchases and sales with him by selling them gold or silver and buying from them their cash or bank credits. Doug's behavior should give anyone pause before considering entering into contract with him to buy gold or silver from him.

Doug still does not seem understand the fallacy of the strawman argument. Idiotically, Doug claimed "gold and silver hold their purchasing power over time". Whether or not Doug believes that to be true or Doug says such a phrase to wheedle others into buying gold and silver from Doug lacks relevancy.

It is not a strawman argument to compare things directly to which anyone would have lost their purchasing power had they bought gold and silver. It's a direct counterclaim. Producing a factual direct counterclaim so refutes your false claim, easily. 

One of those things is the S&P 500. Anyone can buy a share the S&P 500. The S&P 500 is one of those factual direct counterclaims.

I gave Doug a perfect example of what would be a strawman argument:

Doug's premiseYou say, gold and silver hold their purchasing power over time.
StrawmanBut I say, so what! FDR banned gold ownership with Executive Order 6102.
Knocked down strawman: You could buy gold today and have the government take it tomorrow. 
Ironically, Doug Eberhardt of's (that is the site Doug who commented put into the Disqus comments) argument against me is an example of the strawman fallacy. To wit:
After Doug Eberhardt said all should buy gold and silver because "gold and silver hold their purchasing power over time," Smack MacDougal showed factual instances where gold and silver lost purchasing power against other things.
Doug Eberhardt responded by implying that he was surprised that Smack hates anyone speculating on gold and silver so much that he wants them to become bankrupt by losing out on going long gold and silver. 
Doug Eberhardt of ought to prove to the world that he can time the market for gold and silver, exactly. His publicly-accessible writing on his blog alludes to Doug having such skill. However, Doug's publicly-accessible writing on his blog seems to be a whole bunch of gibberish masquerading as experience.

In True Dollars™, which is what counts, gold and silver will be going down for years, not months, but for years to come. There are no drivers for gold, none.

Read more ...

Saturday, July 25, 2015


With the Internet, like most everything else, the good and the bad stand before you. You must decide.

Sometimes the bad of the Internet is baneful stupidity spread by Financial End Times preachers. Spewing populist sermons from their blogger pulpits, these deliverance preachers promise to guide their flocks through Financial Armageddon. Such Financial End Times preachers are fond of fleecing their flocks with sales of their numerous books of revelation.

These Financial End Times preachers claim the financial apocalypse is always about to happen soon. They claim to have the gift of financial prophecy. For them, their Satan, their evil foe is the supposed Financial New World Order.

One of the more insidious sermons often preached is how "the debt is going to explode in our faces." These preachers breathe fiery sermons of brimstone and treacle, that devil-spawn bankers and corrupted law givers have engaged in such financial evils that a price must be paid to set things aright.

Reality of course is far different from superstition.

The Greenspan-Bernanke Great Inflation, the biggest credit bubble in the history of mankind led to peak GDP. After the Greenspan-Bernanke Great Inflation blew up, deflation started. We're only seeing signs now of banking deflation stopping.

First under Bernanke and then under Yellen, central bankers have masked that deflation with what they call Quantitative Easing. And that is the whole point of Quantitative Easing. Quantitative Easing makes everyone believe that prices they look upon with their eyes are at least the same as before if not slightly higher.

If you were to ask almost everyone you were to meet if prices of things are up or down in their supermarkets and elsewhere, they would tell you that prices are up. Of course, as all prices get quoted in dollars, dollar prices are up.

However, once you look at prices in True Dollars™, you would find that true prices are down for almost everything.

Credit isn't any different. Credit is up in current dollars. Since credit is the flip side of debt, debt is up in current dollars. Populist end times financial preachers point to current dollar charts of debt and have their flock believing locusts are about ready to swarm.

However, in True Dollars™, credit is down and thus so is debt, for everyone. So let's have a look.

Where do the women and men of Congress stand with their debt? Congress debt has fallen to true GDP peak-approaching 2007 levels.

What about the law givers of the various states and counties and municipalities?

What does the debt position of financial firms look like?

Where are the non-financial corporations?

Where are the non-financial businesses not incorporated?

And what about individuals, where do households stand these days on debt?

As you can see from the table below, that all parties of the economy have been reducing their true debt, their debt tallied in True Dollars™.

Unlike the populist financial end times preachers as well as those other superstition lot, the academia economist preachers, I give you to scientific reality. You won't find anywhere else on the Internet, my charts, all of which correspond to the reality everyone experiences daily.

Read more ...

Friday, July 24, 2015


Comments left upon web pages can reveal how what many believe. Today, for a story about Amazon's recent stock run up, which has given Amazon a market valuation higher than Walmat I came across these gems:
"Cheap people support Walmart to knock out small businesses. Cheap and lazy people support Amazon to knock out Walmart and their peers. People who would have worked for small business owners would have been small businesses owners themselves have become Walmart employees. Now Amazon is taking over with their robots. Some people are going away indefinitely."

And this one:

"Everyone talks about supporting their local economy claiming everyone should be willing to pay more to support local economy. Always they say they hate cheap, job-killing imports, but then they buy from Amazon.
"I patronize Amazon because I can get things there that I cannot find sold in my local stores. I agree however, that Walmart and Amazon are part of the trend to destroy local economies. In the old days, you would go to a half dozen local businesses to buy supplies, which today, you can buy at Staples. Profits stayed local, in local banks. Today, profits go straight to the big Wall Street banks which are not interested in the small piddling deals offered by local economies."

Alas, these comments reflect a slew of false beliefs. First, in the days of money — coined metal by weight and fineness — during the growing seasons of farming, money was shipped to the money centers, deposited with money center bankers, who then lent against those reserves to speculators of all kinds.

Local economies would grind to standstills during those times. When harvest time came, money would be recalled from money center banks. Only then would the local economy see activity.

In the days of horse-and-buggy, the blacksmith, the wainwright, farrier, saddler, wheelwright, each held monopoly in their respective towns.

As everyone else had little capital, there were few wages to be had. Most children were stuck on farms, wage-less. Plowmen had to bargain with these skilled monopolists who held bargaining power.

With the advent of the automobile and factory production methods, first tools and then machinery — both are capital — replaced handmaking. Because of profits on that capital, wages could be paid.

Boys and girls grew up and left farms for wages. Their living standards grew with gaining wages. Wherever capital sprung up, people's lives improved.

But wherever capital sprung up, the local economy monopolists — the blacksmith, the wainwright, farrier, saddler, wheelwright — lost hold of their bargaining power as their methods were replaced by machinery and partitioned methods.

Amazon and Wal-mart free up resources in local economies so that specialization can arise. Those who lose to Amazon and Wal-mart must find new ways to earn their living.

Everyone else who earns their living by another way get richer by spending less for the same products. Amazon and Wal-mart increase the profit for everyone else.

With more profit from the same effort, the beneficiaries of Amazon and Wal-mart now can spend their new found profit on same earnings in other ways, locally on new the products of new ventures, locally investing in those new ventures, or elsewhere.

It's odd how these Luddites fail to lament the rise of mechanized farm equipment, which led to the displacement of millions of Americans from working as farmers. Would they rather have Americans walking behind horse and plow, living at bare subsistence with meager earnings.

If Americans still lived that way, we wouldn't have the Internet, television, wireless smart phones and millions of other products. Living would resemble American life in the 1700s.

Read more ...

Wednesday, July 22, 2015


Back in 1888, The Knickerbocker Press published a work by Roderick Henry Smith titled, The Science of Business a Study of the Principles Controlling the Laws of Exchange. Smith completed the work in July, 1885. And yes, you read that date right. These aren't typos or mental errors on my part.

The first two chapters yield much entertainment. Smith piles on a litany of examples to show that things in motion take paths of least resistance and that many things move in cycles, though Smith called such movement smaller rhythms within larger rhythms. It is from these two claimed principles that Smith attempts to build his argument.

Smith opens with this:

In the third chapter, Smith wrote,

Later in the chapter, Smith delivered this gem:

So, after breezing through Smith's work, I began googling for data for counts on firms and failures so that I might construct a time series of survival-to-failure ratio and plot the results. Alas, that data can't be had anywhere.

The best I could find is the something the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) publishes called the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW). The QCEW reports a count of employment and wages reported by employers to State unemployment insurance programs comprising 98% of wage and salary civilian employment in the country.

The QCEW doesn't have counts of firms nor does it have counts of failures. The worst bit, there is almost six months lag from the end of a quarter to the release of its respective data! That is so laggy to be almost useless.

However, the QCEW does have something — establishment counts! Establishment counts can stand in as a proxy as firm counts since every year for decades now, the ratio of establishments to firms has increased.

An establishment gets defined as single economic unit, such as a farm, a mine, a factory, or a store, that produces goods or services. Establishments exist at one physical location and engaged in one, or predominantly one, type of economic activity for which a single industrial classification may be applied.

OK, let's look at some pictures. First up, let's look at the quarterly change in all establishments.

If we keep in mind what Smith claimed — "the percentage number of failures to the year has been found to be always greater in the first quarter of the year than in the last three..." — we might hit on something useful.

As can be seen at the far left, the economy experienced a mild recession leading up to the heinous anti-American terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, the recession that Greenspan refused to let deepen.

The net change to Q1 2002 was -5,536 establishments. Greenspan then more than doubled up in his quest to set off the Greenspan-Bernanke Great Inflation, the greatest credit bubble in the history of mankind.

As you can see after Greenspan acted to cut rates repeated, a growth happened in Q1 establishments all the way through 2006.

The massive drop of -50,348 at Q1 2007 should have been the canary in the coalmine. And had I known about the QCEW, I could have told Americans in September 2007 that peak GDP was coming — it did by the end of Q4 2007 — and that a stock crash would happen — it did by March 6, 2009. As it is, the Q1 2008 net change of -45,789, confirmed the previous year's disastrous number.

There is another thing to notice about this graph. This graph confirms what I've been telling you for awhile, we're living in the Greatest Depression. Every net change in the Q1 establishment count from 2009 through 2014 has been negative. There is no way there can be true growth in GDP when Q1 net change in establishment counts is negative year-over-year, consistently.

Academician economists teach a false doctrine about what they call "real GDP," by which they mean trying to deflate current dollar GDP with past inflated GDP. It still shocks that few see the absurdity in that feebleness.

However, when GDP gets expressed in True Dollars™, you can see the reality of declining true GDP. The graph above supports perfectly the GDP graph below. And it is for the ongoing decline in True GDP confirmed by horrible first quarter numbers in the net change in establishments that keep Janet Yellen from doing anything about interest rates, quite likely.

Now, let's take a look at a few others.

There is two ways you could look at this chart. One way is to see that American manufacturing has been a depression for a long time. Yet, another way is to see that American manufacturing needs ever fewer establishments.  To be sure, the Q1 2014 positive net change number is the first time that has happened in at least 13 years.

Q1 2007 and Q1 2008 net changes in establishment counts for construction  also acted as canaries. It's likely crucial for the Q1 2015 number to come in positive.

The Information sector is leading the recovery. It should be clear that Information sector suffered for a long time from the Dot Com Bubble blow up.

And here is the chart that makes me believe the economy is going to shift into higher gears soon. Positive financial activity must come before major advance as all advances arise from the expansion of credit.

Well, we must await until mid-September for those Q1 numbers. And yes, this stuff is genius.

Say, you can hire me. If you need a C-level strategy guy who can see stuff you can't, email now.

Read more ...

Sunday, July 19, 2015


Today in Forbes, I read Tear Down This Reagan by Bill Whalen , a worker on the payroll of the Hoover Institution. In this work, Whalen describes the ugly underneath politics over a statue of former U.S. president and California governor Ronald Reagan. It seems a recalled California Supreme Court judge Cruz Reynoso has a grudge against Reagan.

Worshiping statues chiseled from stone or forged from bronze is the stuff of superstition. Rejecting the gods of one people to be replaced by the gods one favors is the stuff of savages. And yet this is what Cruz Reynoso has urged Americans to do. We're living in the 21st century, right?

If only Americans from long ago through today would have embraced naming of cities, states, bridges, schools and so forth after beliefs Americans ought to hold sacred rather than naming everything after dead politicians and dead presidents, maybe America wouldn't be in such a state of retrogression. Today, then, rather than Lincoln High School, Americans would have Bill of Rights High School. Instead of the George Washington Bridge, Americans would have the Liberty Bridge. Instead of the Kennedy Space Center, we would have Americans Paid Taxes for this Indulgence Space Center.

Over the centuries, U.S. congresses and the state houses have created their own polytheistic religion. To indoctrinate all Americans into their religion they have conjured up prayers — the Pledge of Allegiance — and moments to their gods — Mt. Rushmore, the Lincoln Memorial and so forth.

Naming things after dead law givers and putting up statues of them works as persuasion in a kind of propaganda. Everywhere you go, you get reminded that law givers were living gods in their times and that your prosperity, luck and life gets owed to these gods.

Americans need more statues like the State of Liberty and no statues of dead law givers. After all, liberty, the French word for the English word freedom, means the absence of law in the presence of law givers. Americans need to abandon their superstitious polytheistic religion.

We're living in the twenty-first century. The goal should be to have the least governance as needed rather than the relentless pursuit of the most governance as tolerable.

Read more ...

Thursday, July 16, 2015


With the rhetoric flying during crunch time in the Greek Bonds Crisis, one phrase struck me — "Greece is at the heart of Europe." Geographically, I know that isn't true. Depending on method of measurement, the geographical midpoint of Europe is either the village of Purnuškes near Vilnius, Lithuania, or the village of Mõnnuste, on Saaremaa island in western Estonia.

"Heart of Europe European" (left), "Greek" (right)
So thinking further upon that deceptive rhetoric — "Greece is at the heart of Europe" — I began to wonder, are Greeks even European? As well, what does being European even mean?

A site titled Eupedia lists the haplogroups of Y-chromosome DNA for the various people of Europe. A haplogroup consists of haplotypes that have a common ancestor.

Males have Y-chromosomes. Females do not. No amount of cross-dressing or getting breast implants or other surgeries can turn males into females.

Males of the same Y-chromosome DNA haplogroup have a common ancestral father.

Looking at the Eupedia data, there are a few kinds of Greeks — northern, central / Aegean Islander, southern, Cypriot, Cretin. 

The central Greek / Aegean Islander Greek is much the same as an Albanian.

The southern Greek is much the same as a Kosovoan.

Cretins are much the same as Anatolian Turks.

Cypriot males and Cretin males share quite a bit in common with some so-called Middle Easterners — Azerbaijani, Kurds from Iraq, and Lebanese.

What defines a European? Are Moldovians, Slovakians, Slovenians, Ukrainians, Czechs, Poles, Latvians or Russians?

The Moldovians, Slovakians, Slovenians and Ukrainians are much alike. The Belarusans are their close cousins. 

Likewise, the Czechs and the Poles are alike. The Hungarians are their close cousins. 

Though they might not like it, the Latvians and the Russians are much alike. 

The Estonians, Lithuanians and Maris in Russia are the same people. These are the people living in the geographic heart of Europe. Are the Estonians, the Lithuanians and the Maris the heart of Europe?

The Bosnian Serbs and the Serbs from Serbia are the same people.

Both Serbs are much alike to the Macedonians and the Montenegrans.

The Bosniaks, Bosnian Croats, the Croatians, and Romanians are the same people.

Except for the Russians who have big population, none of the aforementioned peoples comprise a big population. And these days, no one living in Europe much like the Russians. So the Russians could not comprise the heart of Europe.

The Danes and the Swedes are more or less the same people.

And their geographical neighbors, the Norwegians are mirror images of them.

There are quite of few so-called Europeans who have a common ancestor.

The French from the - Midi-Pyrénées along with the Italians from Central Italy, South Italy and Sicily as well as the Spaniards from Andalusia are the same people.

The Tuscan Italians and the Spaniards from Castile-La-Mancha are the same people.

The Corsicans, the Aragons from Spain and the Spaniards from Basque country are the same people.

The supposed French from Auvergne and the supposed Spaniards from Asturias and Cantabria are much alike.

The French from IIle-de-France and from Provence are much alike with the Italians from North Italy, the Spaniards from Castile and Leon, Catalonia, Extremadura, Galicia and Valencia along with all of the Portuguese. 

The Belgians, the French from Flanders-Artois, the French from Normandy and the Welsh are the same people.

The Austrians overall, the Deutsch from North Germany and the Deutsch from East Germany are the same people.

The Tyrolians from Austria, the French from the Rhône-Alpes, Deutsch from West Germany, and Deutsch from South Germany are the same people as well as Icelanders, Norwegians and Scots. All of these people share the same ancestor.

Though they might not want to acknowledge it, the English and the Irish are the same people. They're the same people along with the French Bretons, the Dutch and the Swiss.

So does anyone constitute the heart of Europe? Are there Europeans? Maybe these people do.

In short, Greeks are a mash-up of a Balkan people with Middle Eastern people.
Without doubt, the Greeks do not constitute the heart of Europe. The Greeks seem far on the edges of everything these days. 

Read more ...