 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑
" w6 g) J4 y- j" k) g j. ~7 X" j, [
' M1 e2 x# M; f; k2 |/ C! P2 ~# \( J* s, n+ v/ e y3 s
你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:
: r' b" d, j& ]Ralph Klein% F/ G7 t; e4 Q
- U( I8 a# e5 g) ^# L0 G+ V
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 Q8 n* @& k4 J+ L. ?5 }" d2 S: E6 |8 _7 H& R
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。
, _' j( Z8 M8 I4 {. G8 S$ q; S! D( P% G# E8 H" Z+ A9 z( B
6 A; q8 {, r5 c% S; }( g2 `6 |2 _0 V% p3 {
http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades
" s3 z( C7 X1 `Historic Alberta budget balances:
1 R7 p; o: v( z5 `, S/ s( ]1 g" I* V8 _- Y8 {
1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus6 R8 z# f" v5 i; h
, O& w7 V, k: j2 n. e/ \4 k1982-83: $796 million deficit
4 H. M7 s3 y7 I* m. r7 f; ~/ n: F2 p+ N5 C) \3 _' a3 T" c
1983-84: $129 million surplus
6 i8 e2 s, S2 [8 q
8 R; g6 m" K/ u \1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus
' c/ ~+ F, X; v! l8 ?5 ?
( z/ T3 j4 H% L1985-86: $761 million deficit
0 |9 a5 B; f) X. T
) [/ i& i: N( b. D! P- O; q1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit
; k: ^0 }. v* X7 V) J
4 t# `$ n: x7 x6 B( M1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit
: P' t# @' a& x& W8 S3 q' b" Y
5 O8 H2 J' g" Z$ H U1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit5 p! H2 E+ _5 P8 t" }, d- C
% z! a$ {2 `1 }/ j1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit
1 S! `! y0 k% W" F5 B% f$ T
! R4 \8 p0 F; M1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit
& I' k$ S& Z( l s
$ u6 K! k6 q6 ^* A R' P* t1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit- g+ d h2 [( K# i" P# P! U/ U
& v* t% C% ^+ a9 [7 I! n1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit' @& D( j6 w* P6 R7 w
! T+ |% t. |5 l) }1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit; ~4 D# d5 |8 Z+ d
9 k7 D6 o! b& y% A, ^1994-95: $938 million surplus+ ~( z# s. \" Y4 d) s
. W/ X- p. {* g9 g; N* x1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus
) p3 m) i! [6 w c9 h" G
! E( r8 F e0 p1 Y( D. D& r1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus) p$ ?0 ~. _8 ?9 c. d
1 \! o5 _' k+ a
1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus6 K5 j9 F# r/ X
" [! h0 A' e y0 V0 c% n; C. ]1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus
3 T+ @7 e ^3 x$ t. Z; }- R9 T
& m0 E) N* y. N1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus
/ }+ X9 ~) Y/ H L& j) c, h8 G( g7 o% `. Q0 U, W: X1 u! P/ F6 K
2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus* o1 q' T' D, O2 B0 ~6 M/ U& L& ]
/ Z9 M% D+ R6 z4 S/ Y2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus
+ K b6 x; j5 E+ G
* g/ g# C+ L& n9 u" s$ \% z& s' ^2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus& d% i) M, \7 e B+ E
: o3 h% |) m; P& L; M* h5 M2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus
7 e0 A& W, }% N% e' ]3 e
}6 R0 Z4 ?5 ~/ d' f2 n2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus' v- f, k1 u" n1 \
- ]* ~9 x# G- Z8 M2 S2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus& a- v/ E4 O6 n
4 t: _( n A6 H3 c$ g c
2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus6 J* @. \: q" R
+ R7 @: L. a6 w% Q7 z" y8 X2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus
& V8 E0 q1 G) k0 H/ {# U8 g2 @3 J) Y/ n' ` a2 S
2008-09: $852 million deficit' \' e+ ~) N; D j; g; y0 ^+ D
4 Z6 S$ E h% a* [/ [% g
2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit
3 M4 u( h7 t% }& a6 Q- a) i/ i# G, E" t) s
2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit2 a$ L( v" J( o. b
; z8 t1 d1 Z- z# F9 a. h: ]% O- d
2011-12: $23 million deficit8 A' ?- o! X8 Z& l0 u
7 t' E% p, i( V. }& s" i( q+ Q2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit
2 x( d9 R+ v" q; F8 p, D5 S" U/ i& d
2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|