 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑
+ e9 z% e, d+ H/ T) lpeterpan 发表于 2015-10-5 12:38
, A4 {; B" Q+ Q4 O8 ?4 Z0 B5 y4 U1 @1. 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?
4 Y: `% R& G, H e) i z2. 我之前也说过了,不要老拿低油 ...
' n9 d0 O5 {& x' S. r& `
3 z, X- R1 m1 N4 N你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:
( r. q% A* e% j, F8 |Ralph Klein n2 T5 X3 O r' Z2 i5 e5 q+ H
5 r6 H* w4 H6 w0 Y! h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!5 _( [' k: E8 O
5 I5 l" c9 j( d* E, s& p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。9 u9 A& A* o+ F$ A8 D9 d& c4 d
. W8 d K, k7 G) G+ d+ B
! h9 Z. V9 O3 `8 {) b' w7 L+ l
9 Y8 ~$ w3 `' `& dhttp://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades
$ v: b( {5 a* i% j! ?Historic Alberta budget balances:
6 J7 m5 W. v9 o4 b+ k+ e
+ z! a& z( Q0 i) E1 J1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus
0 D( H4 K0 ?5 x" V6 g* ?4 C9 Q( E' K1 d, q- @# d
1982-83: $796 million deficit2 ~' O2 ?! a+ |' S
, l( y s1 _; [! f+ V1983-84: $129 million surplus
4 B& o# P; @; c& ?! }2 |1 S* F3 [# W7 t; j
1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus
: c4 n; v) w9 E# O! Q4 _6 f7 X0 J* P$ X* ?
1985-86: $761 million deficit
8 z% Y- B' O0 H) v$ M$ S
3 ^0 _ Z0 {$ p$ R5 }7 D1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit
- {" x- B0 M9 M, v8 O6 O% d8 h& X/ W$ ^
, k" ]' a+ ]: L" B' _- O1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit
4 X% X9 s; o$ ~& |6 X1 u$ z/ d( h# F0 h0 h: A( v% Z7 e
1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit
# M c8 Q, D9 ^& z; S+ ^2 k$ _* v! ?4 v) k2 a
1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit
' F* I' p4 p9 \* F6 q% U. {% D7 W( P3 w4 e7 C) ]
1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit# }' z/ S( x* u# W0 W
- H0 m, N" }4 c; D% i1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit
$ P& C9 c( d6 u+ D
5 b- ^) I% K% r7 N5 t3 X1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit$ E5 X' C0 ?5 [
8 C0 D" {) y! j$ {+ s+ `5 n: o
1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit
7 @+ l2 M" S# U6 f/ q
$ V( N' _+ @) d" L/ A- R1994-95: $938 million surplus
6 |* Q. v" U6 m0 p/ f: A: f+ A7 p. I9 T7 O' N' ], z
1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus
. ~+ k# G5 ^9 w9 L) u( a/ W2 m
- M" D0 o# y3 B1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus
2 D G) M& v) P( y; e0 x) I1 y0 o! o* x) `% Y) f, n# t! w
1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus
* l0 x g0 f4 V% a
" D9 J. m4 ?; b+ E! ]1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus
; [/ T0 X- L0 M0 P2 O7 Y
1 {- d6 o, n$ c* h/ v. P* ^) a8 c1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus. [% a2 v4 x( t+ z' [# g3 z
) O) E; ]* k( i5 R# y8 O5 B1 v$ L2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus
8 p9 L: \6 M% F6 j: T2 J, `8 C# L M- A; r% s; X
2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus. ?4 x4 |7 W% d( a8 K
2 g; f) n8 c0 Q% |) f2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus/ F7 x4 \& y2 n; N2 w
h2 T* c6 I# A: ]2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus
% n6 n `; V! j& T8 u
4 k* P; M8 Y9 Z5 x( I3 {2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus* ^- A/ o$ A+ A3 F
4 ]3 z/ g" E! ^. c( ^9 ?- r
2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus8 o& b9 |" O' J& V$ Q
8 E9 g. w# [) W+ C2 U) t2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus8 J7 Z8 C' q6 U6 ~
$ E. s4 `0 O; m% Q! s7 S, S+ a6 u# y
2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus
! \# z* M2 {7 y' H( _8 s* C. ?
1 }% f! a, r: C1 F$ r* }3 u2008-09: $852 million deficit
+ H! ~' I2 N2 X4 \) i
W, }# C. y9 s4 z) Y5 N/ @# o2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit
9 [' Z2 ~) z7 N" ^- U, M# E
- t; [% O1 v/ H4 }$ z0 u2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit2 m: S$ R, m, U9 z- |- m
- b1 [) d, W1 U) L- t* b2 I" E
2011-12: $23 million deficit' I+ b6 h2 O" `" K5 C& K8 U6 k; c
4 L v2 T# A; r, U# Z$ ?# X2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit
& l. a5 V# M5 d9 F: c- q
% k3 ^4 k8 s" D8 }- G2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|