 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑 + I" c, y' P& ~
peterpan 发表于 2015-10-5 12:38
, @ T7 _( ~0 o: M1. 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?" L( i( Q2 S& c5 D/ f* X$ H% E; M# I
2. 我之前也说过了,不要老拿低油 ...
: t" c0 r d G5 `: O2 _
) [* Y1 k" p7 D你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:
1 s& h4 A1 ~. b1 Q- [6 ^' g/ H. y/ ARalph Klein6 _8 `4 z7 k* V0 h: ` N4 B
2 o: M5 W) o* {% F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!0 l- ` W, G* }; [5 e6 @
w! f+ d8 U' U3 Z5 x( Z
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。
+ g# I0 A0 F2 ~: [, _# X) V% S1 U r) q! h+ y
j, q! [% w" r4 m# e
5 k1 N4 m) [, q+ R1 t: a0 Q
http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades
3 r. Z1 l+ k* E6 F+ ]( I& Y3 ?Historic Alberta budget balances:
% `# g- b$ P6 r" P1 t
: P( X# E+ b9 L: O4 C1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus/ g- w6 {5 m& ]! Z0 ^1 b( O( Y
" z( \- d# j% E2 m. `5 r- t- c
1982-83: $796 million deficit: A H2 Y$ Y; t6 p& I
/ H! K T" @4 T2 J9 E$ S1 n, D
1983-84: $129 million surplus3 z/ Y9 u5 q5 v
/ `0 V9 M0 n) q
1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus' Y3 L7 L8 I3 A! G* v
$ ]' l* _2 q5 |$ u1985-86: $761 million deficit: S7 |" c9 ^ ` ?; a+ K' y5 r
& H6 j: i3 [8 J2 i4 U. K5 j; |
1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit
! k2 p+ d6 m+ I) n
4 S2 K) G8 [! z' w2 E3 Q2 o( {1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit0 N, B G' B* h$ |) F, X) [7 D
) v& x7 t& O- u* x4 V/ c# q% z" C1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit/ A* I9 L" u" K( t$ ?* W
9 p4 r2 `- o, E. {# p! T1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit! I% u7 Z0 A4 S0 K0 ^
% @& R$ p t+ @6 n3 M7 g, s% g9 G0 U
1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit
" j7 D5 e8 A0 ~" l5 A& \3 E' r$ Q! j- |2 |0 ~) K, Y
1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit! i# K; }% G" H0 \3 A, @6 C; X
1 Y/ u0 Q# w* E* w. V8 ~+ y( D$ C
1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit% h( m V$ j6 O
0 l% l0 y. F* z1 Z1 a3 x, {0 T
1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit
5 d* G, J" a/ |5 W4 R' \& M2 N4 D5 I: f3 P8 c. C
1994-95: $938 million surplus q( j( [" z! v7 f" ?) p
' v' @; r! k# J& p1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus. |5 n8 l, g9 \. l. c, B3 c
- A2 X' B8 j4 g8 j1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus
/ X2 c% i H& n, T3 g8 k4 d: D% F5 V# ~9 B$ p
1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus
( y6 g9 c( i4 D8 G) M* v% ^5 l: N/ F" r8 U2 P, |9 l- A
1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus$ `0 w; E8 S- k3 n; X' K
{3 N0 R( P7 _: U) k+ a1 G# W1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus
9 N' S* t9 R' T; T, U' T6 J% y2 ^' g; [+ N
2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus
( |" w, n0 J0 H/ X
" t$ F! P/ l0 T: t. U, F2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus
. k3 B3 U: L( X$ G0 r
: F+ s2 [9 s1 x; ^9 U2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus
8 j1 v- {; X h0 Y* T" \' m' S
7 W+ c5 _0 F5 D5 {+ ?* O2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus
/ j7 _6 O0 o2 H7 B- R5 n+ L' T! o* M& b) Y; t. ^- x
2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus
5 l& m I6 B) k: s) g9 e# S, U( ?. s6 d4 |
2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus+ d" S* u+ a4 ~. O& ?
; o- ]: H0 ^- j9 J) o4 v
2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus* _' d r# g7 ]7 P# R0 u
1 R. x0 j% l4 S
2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus
' k, Y d/ m4 S9 ]0 G/ b* ~( l2 n/ b8 D" W& k9 S
2008-09: $852 million deficit; M0 G1 j0 b+ P3 i
% m: n/ I# m+ J( ~
2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit
1 O- N2 I! M% K9 O- V: _) C1 k) S4 F8 n; d9 N
2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit4 [$ g$ Z7 Z v0 m; x5 f
5 n1 F0 [! Z& v) `7 B7 n2 c
2011-12: $23 million deficit" V6 o V- \+ A- T& V& U: m d
; C" k" _" U4 e4 |7 m9 W1 }7 [, h
2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit/ e3 {- q0 U4 _+ b1 o; [
$ d5 ^/ c2 e3 Y H# ` d2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|