1.
Political Elections, Economy and Quo Vadis
Most importantly, to understand the politics ritual and the impact on the economy of the
Balkan countries, where Albania is distinguished by its characteristic to create problems
that are unrelated to reality (only the jubilation of leaders and justifications of a
leadership involved in political and economic informality) is the actually situation where
politicians saturated with any good that power has brought (or taken) in their hands, are
not clear about the future and do not know what to look for.
The disaster of the whole history of modern Albania is that the evil identified in the
general public, such as the one who has the power to do the disaster for them, has the
scheme ready and the opportunity (from time to time) to break up its dirty problems in
among the country's mejdan, including all of Albanians audience and beyond in potential
fake crises, which are the main purpose of this informal minority.
This "political customized dish" may not happen tomorrow, and I believe it will not
happen at all. But, seeing that political influences and moral impacts on informal
situations sometimes tend to turn away from informality, then it seems that the evil of a
political leadership minority seeking to escape its ultimate lurking over the status quo of
the rest of other part of leadership and encourages the return in the evil of all.
If we want to see how much the political situation has affected the economy in these
years of fake debate without any profitable economic product for citizens, it is enough to
read the progress of domestic production.
Economic growth in periods when political debates (not on behalf of interests of people
and the economy) have been the hottest in Albania, I think are the years 1997, 2001,
2005, 2009 and 2013 that coincide with the elections for political rotation in the country.
In 1997, the value added to the economy declined by 7%, when a year later it increased by
8%.
In 2001, the value added in the economy grew by 6.5%, when the previous year was 7.7%
and the following year was 4.7%.
In 2005, the value added to the economy grew by 5.5%, when the previous year was 6%
and the following year was 5%.
In 2009, the value added to the economy grew by 3.3%, when the previous year was 7.5%
and the following year was 3.9%.
In 2013, the value added in the economy grew by 1.1%, when the previous year was 1.4%
and the following year was 2%.

2.
In 2017, the value added in the economy grew by 3.8%, when the previous year was 3.5%
and the following year (2018) is estimated to be over 4.1%.
Indicators are worth saying that it is not the economy that suffers, but it is the people
and the stability of the country who does not receive the proper portions of democratic
institutional development as well as the development of internal market which is not
measured for every rotation with the winner expectations, but with economic
competitors outside of Albania.
Meanwhile, the political competition in the western Balkans, which in the latest years is
so harsh, could be “translated” in more effective productivity of the economy and more
wellness for the citizens.
The country's biggest damage does not come from the collapse of consumption or
growth and economic downturn, but from the lack of political and economic stability.
The main damage has occurred. The over 25-year-old leadership, who is preparing to
inherit to the new generation the political heritage, in fact has not inherited to them, an
economy and political situation and more assets than they inherited from their parents
and grandparents.
What should the leadership have done to make us feel that they are the right ones for
running the country?
An Albania with per capita income NOT among the lowest in Europe;
An Albania NOT with political conflicts stemming from lying with riches and well-
being (tribal and clan);
An Albania with established geopolitical positions in the region for a long term;
An economy that does not remain dependent on political influence and has not
yet managed to dare to expand and win over informality.
In fact leadership has to think about the fact that the economy in the first place should
be part of the inheritance for the next generation. But the new generation will not have
to deal with actually leadership, but with their ancestors.
If we try to prepare the balance sheets of political assets in the economy we can found
an imbalance. The political election process and the economy are seen by political
leadership, as “bones” thrown to citizens. The political leadership, after eating “the
flesh” of the economy has thought that in some years might push economic growth. In
this point of view it is clear that the names of current leadership for this bad and political
instable situation are within history mentioned in this writing.
It’s about to throw away the fake part of leadership!