Conductor Info

The most exciting event in Slovenia last week was when a group of young army recruits spat on the national flag and sang the anthem of the now defunct former Yugoslavia. They were sent to a military psychiatrist for observation. Indeed, economically speaking, a preference for any other part of the late Federation over Slovenia would indicate mental deformity.

Slovenia is by far the most prosperous and pacific of the lot. Income per capita increased by 7% between 1995-2000 and reached 75% of the EU’s average. Yugoslavia and Macedonia would require half a century to reach this level at current growth rates. Slovenia’s public debt is negligible (c. 26% of GDP), its unemployment rate is almost American (less than 7%), its budget deficit a mere 1.4% of GDP. Slovenia’s gross national savings is almost a quarter of its GDP – as is its gross domestic investment (28%).

It is a respected member of both the World Bank and the IMF. The former has disbursed c. $250 million for purposes such as structural reforms and environmental cleanups. The latter praises its monetary targeting, the managed float of its tolar, and the lack of major (budget and current account) imbalances. This, despite erratic monetary management by the Bank of Slovenia, which, together with the introduction of VAT, the oil price shock, and a totally CPI-indexed financial environment, led to escalating inflation (c. 9% annually, up from 6%).

Thus, should Slovenian officials fail in their efforts to secure agricultural and regional development concessions from their counterparts in Brussels, Slovenia runs the risk of becoming a net creditor of the EU. Slovenia, contrary to most other current members, is openly unhappy with the “Big Bang” enlargement of the Union. It has successfully concluded 22 out 29 chapters to be agreed with the EU prior to accession and it is afraid of being held back by an unrealistic, politically motivated, process of enlargement which will stress the EU’s deficient institutions to their breaking point.

Slovenia is small. It is the size of pre-1967 Israel or New Jersey. With less than 2 million citizens (88% of which are ethnic Slovene), its population grows by a paltry 0.14% p.a. Still, had it not constituted the northern boundary of a war prone and unstable region, Slovenia might have attracted more FDI (it has one of the lowest rates among the candidate countries), bordering as it does and integrated as it is with the (relatively) large and disinflated economies of Italy, Hungary, and Austria. Many Slovenes actually live in Jorg Haider’s part of Austria (Carinthia). Italians owned property (confiscated by the communists) in Slovenia before the Second World War (the source of a simmering grudge in Italy). Italians, Austrians, and Germans invest in Slovenian banks, insurance companies, and industry. Together with Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic (among others), it is a member of the now reawakened CEFTA (Central European Free Trade Agreement). Only 4% of Slovenia’s GDP derives from agriculture (vs. 61% from services). Still, Slovenia, to its great ire, is often associated with the Balkan.

But the bad neighborhood is not the only obstacle. Slovenia’s privatization was as crony-infested as elsewhere in the Eastern Bloc and its legislation still incorporates investment-deterring anachronisms (restricted land and media ownership, an over-regulated labour market, lack of corporate governance). Capital account liberalization was implemented only recently. Close to half of the economy (including a chunk of the favoritism-ridden and inefficient banking system) is in the hands of the state. The private sector, though, is thriving. Growth rates (4% this year) are double the European average and GDP per capita is almost equal to Greece’s or Portugal’s.

Slovenia’s international trade amounts to 60% of its GDP. Two thirds of it is with the EU (half of this with Germany and Austria, the former colonial mater). Its trade with Russia, the USA (3% of the total each), and even with other republics of the disintegrated Yugoslavia is marginal. It still purchases raw materials from Macedonia and Yugoslavia – and sells back to them the finished products (as it used to do in former Yugoslavia). But this does not amount to much. The decoupling is intentional – Slovenia considers itself an integral part of Western Europe. All it inherited from Communism, it feels, was polluted rivers and coastal water, acid rain, and depleted forests. Still, such exposure to the EU makes Slovenia susceptible to the Union’s business cycles. Shortsightedly perhaps, it does not have a trade representation or an economic attaché in the USA.

Of all its erstwhile confederates, Slovenia maintains tenuous political contacts only with Croatia. It just resolved a long standing dispute with Croatia regarding the Krsko nuclear power plant. Both countries agreed to continue discussions regarding the final demarcation of the hotly disputed (in Slovenia) border between the two countries as a prelude to the introduction of the Schengen agreement. Overtures are made to post-Milosevic Yugoslavia. Slovene legislation is eagerly copied by Macedonia. Gradually, albeit reluctantly, Slovenia comes to be regarded as a role model by its southern neighbors who strive to emulate its success.

About The Author

Sam Vaknin is the author of “Malignant Self Love – Narcissism Revisited” and “After the Rain – How the West Lost the East”. He is a columnist in “Central Europe Review”, United Press International (UPI) and ebookweb.org and the editor of mental health and Central East Europe categories in The Open Directory, Suite101 and searcheurope.com. Until recently, he served as the Economic Advisor to the Government of Macedonia.

His web site: http://samvak.tripod.com

When the Food and Drug Administration approved the Ortho Evra Transdermal Birth Control Patch in November 2001, it became the first transdermal patch to effectively deliver a combination of norelgestromin and ethinyl estradiol, two vital hormones that help prevent unwanted pregnancy. The “patch” as it was called, was a revolution in birth control because it allegedly provided the same amount of security against accidental pregnancy in an easier to take format. One large advantage of the Ortho Evra patch, according to its manufacturer Ortho-McNeil, lies in the once weekly application to the skin on the thighs, hips, or upper body rather than a daily pill. The patch is replaced every week in a month except the fourth, which allows a woman to have a menstrual period as normal.

Unfortunately, the high concentrations of the norelgestromin and ethinyl estradiol hormones cause severe and even fatal side effects in some women. Birth control pills have been known to cause blood clots, heart attacks, and strokes in some women, and smoking is also known exacerbate these risks. While many experts believed that there would be similar risks in a transdermal patch, they did not expect the significant increase in fatalities caused by the Ortho Evra patch.

The first fatality linked to Ortho Evra was an 18 year old fashion student in New York who collapsed and died due to a blood clot that traveled into her lungs. This terrible incident was merely the first of many deaths of women of all ages due to the tragic side effects of Ortho Evra. The Associated Press published a report on July 17, 2005 that the chances of suffering a non-fatal blood clot with the birth control pill was approximately 1 and 3 in 10,000, while the risk of dying was 1 in 200,000. The rates for the Ortho Evra patch indicated that non-fatal blood clots occurred 12 out of 10,000 times, while the death rate from these blood clots was 3 out of 200,000. Doctors later confirmed that the Ortho Evra patch increased the likelihood of fatal cardiac-related events by 300%.

Between April 2002 and December 2004, Ortho-McNeil received over 500 reports of incidents related to side effects and cardiovascular problems because of the Ortho Evra Patch. In the same time period, manufacturers of traditional birth control pills received only 61 such complaints. Data also showed that women who used the patch suffered four times as many strokes compared to those who did not. Furthermore, the FDA believes that they only receive between 1 and 10% of the reports of serious reactions, so most experts believe that the fatality rate of the Ortho Evra patch could be even higher than estimated.