 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑 % P3 }, S, X0 Z7 o8 q4 J
peterpan 发表于 2015-10-5 12:38
( p* Y) w/ l2 n2 ^2 X& @7 o( v( Q1. 不行就不行呗,大家也没指望ndp能平衡预算,但吹牛画饼就不好了吧?
! n+ c2 }8 u: m& @+ F8 n2. 我之前也说过了,不要老拿低油 ...
8 g# X8 p/ q; q4 k+ h j$ r* Y o- x% d7 {, q- B
你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:; G6 x/ i* w6 A7 q0 F/ g3 d/ u$ k
Ralph Klein
1 f7 b1 s9 J N( Y4 ?. h# q4 q1 `0 z$ ^
我下面列举了能够查到的历年的省赤字情况。从数据可知,只有Ralph Klein任上是有盈余的。在他之前,要上溯到1985年,也就是30年前,才有盈余。其他的每一年都是赤字!
& P0 z, l U4 w% j! h j }* v" K
所以结论很简单。如果Ralph Klein参选,我肯定选他。如果没有Ralph Klein参选,我有充分理由相信PC会赤字。从Stelmach到Prentice,已经充分证明了他们仅仅是用PC的名义。他们的政策和Ralph Klein完全不同。Ralph Klein一上台就把省府部门砍了1/3,这次选举只有WR提到了裁减。你用PC10几20年前的情况套用到现在属于刻舟求剑。事实上Ralph Klein在PC历史上属于一个异常情况,Stelmach/Redford/Prentice才是PC的本质。Ralph Klein时期是没有WR的,右翼选民觉得PC可以代表他们。Ralph Klein之后PC往NDP靠拢,才会出现WR的支持基础。
* q( s8 @ w: m# T$ v( f
. I+ S8 }/ k3 d3 Z' d+ L* t
3 s+ ^7 P/ f' G
7 w8 _6 Z; o0 |, u8 L( Vhttp://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades
8 g8 |# V9 H8 _/ m& ]4 u* u8 tHistoric Alberta budget balances:, o' E7 F8 s7 o7 A5 X
& z: e H' s P) @: I& a1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus
: W. {( k: X. b* b& F
& |6 o& O. u' P3 d; M6 v7 V; P1982-83: $796 million deficit
$ X% {1 P3 O7 o. |! r$ A$ }7 T3 K
) O1 \/ g% {0 T# L6 ]1983-84: $129 million surplus
& {8 n$ d9 b9 N: b
. [. d: ~' }3 C( y# j1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus
, Y6 A8 z# z5 k' M
* S6 ^5 O$ c& h3 ~1 u1985-86: $761 million deficit: [/ H7 w8 }2 |! N
' g7 }* ]4 K3 z n+ ?# n4 @1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit: E- D5 u, Q- l6 M( X8 m' D! [0 P
- n: @8 r7 E H; |+ ?2 e" e: Z
1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit
9 G O! i) ]* o
0 Z7 @; _5 V% @4 B1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit
; b( g! F! g+ o5 {
7 Z% T- |9 w% T/ H1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit3 U- K5 U. k- }
3 V+ P( C5 y4 A4 I8 X! }
1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit
/ H8 B; D |' A* W4 F6 T2 x: \+ L+ g' ]9 |' A& E8 p; Y- |
1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit# ? [+ W4 {, ~$ Z0 E
: w) f9 y- X5 }% g6 `1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit! l( N; ]* M$ B- Y1 D
) @$ U3 n; `" Q( F/ w6 h3 i
1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit
% K- h3 t! B% e4 L9 s. w. D0 P( ^8 H4 d# N( r( X3 U! B+ k
1994-95: $938 million surplus- ^$ N: F9 O0 v& q, H% m: n- T
& J {9 q, H- \) x7 N [3 t2 F2 N
1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus' _" }/ S) A+ e; l; X1 B- T7 _9 ^
0 `6 e. ]5 s! N U9 N$ U1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus# |5 s6 ?0 G# I+ M- J
0 F; Z1 X% E. }
1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus5 _2 g4 h9 C, r/ k9 q, q. I
& {0 d) B9 [! y9 _1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus% b+ |3 T9 o4 Z! g$ [, z% W) C
( o5 h' f5 _& T; U: l5 ?8 ~; e
1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus; G! w+ y! T& z
# Y; c1 ]6 `9 t# [
2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus3 S- Q. k& q6 s/ e- [
k! Y; Y7 i }3 S0 x5 y
2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus) J7 P9 h0 r" R! { o! V
! w5 r; j) H/ ^' D" M% b2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus/ d F9 K" ~1 x
% V5 e' j* q$ N0 {3 {2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus
6 C& ~- |& L" k" D5 M2 B/ j8 l+ y( U* b9 o5 y! }9 C6 i
2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus
7 ], {. _( d) \7 N( }2 K- |5 w! i, f" i
2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus
! V- S7 b0 X! h6 Q
3 f' C _1 p8 V4 B/ _% x! a2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus
& g. i, \" D) X1 U+ x% M+ ]' w$ t v/ P5 n! p! t( P% U8 e
2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus
% d, Y+ P3 @( M
4 K2 ?% ?2 \6 g3 s1 F# S3 [$ |2008-09: $852 million deficit
9 q9 A( S+ a M; S k" J
! E1 p* E6 y$ q! r: E! }2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit8 O% T7 ^* D* y& @( c% h. ^
* ^' p: _- K3 k
2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit) n! D, b0 s0 G* v
4 D3 g! B& x7 z, y1 `2011-12: $23 million deficit
9 v Z% N" j: ]3 o- c$ v6 i* V/ @, ^8 b; C
2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit* I2 y1 |' W" _% z, U" I
! i. x$ n: y5 Q) j* e
2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|