 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑
4 i; s1 _" H; q( h
/ t" |& N2 @. A3 h; d+ ], j7 M
1 C) `: x" n4 ^* B C6 f7 Y6 R你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:0 t2 U6 h' v* s
Ralph Klein" S3 k2 r, P- r* j" R+ l6 V$ K6 J
) |/ T* _& C/ Z9 c; 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!
& r, ]$ m* Z3 n/ W
4 A H/ L# f6 _/ S. r( A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。7 r& s( p8 i* s; x7 U
+ s2 o6 a+ S% W8 ^+ r5 f
* B. T0 r# ^8 Y$ R7 a
/ G1 d' ]$ O7 s: u6 |http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades
& I# J# h5 u8 i7 W( }Historic Alberta budget balances:
$ q! [0 e- X h( u5 E
5 ]# [- M! S/ U6 m5 t% {- ~1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus
# B/ s$ c$ T) _
# d/ N! R5 d( B7 c0 [1982-83: $796 million deficit
( S* P3 ^1 ]" {6 n* i8 z1 F
- c7 A8 e. W( ]2 Q1983-84: $129 million surplus
4 C S6 e5 u/ D6 m8 P5 K
: _ S4 b; |) L! R) t) _; g4 R5 `1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus
$ _" I% W8 @3 W( N7 P, M9 I' C4 S% Q/ |
1985-86: $761 million deficit
+ F" i% S) ?7 {' R* t
: ]# u, s9 }+ N+ t% |) I1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit
4 t/ q3 m8 x4 L" |0 }
0 Q9 n5 D9 v7 C2 C* s2 n) T% m1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit
$ |, _0 r9 Z# U. x3 w ]' N0 W% h/ m& g V
1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit
% m3 D: ?1 X' H# d2 `5 m( k2 P, y* k" \6 h" O
1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit& y; ^. W k& q# ~5 U4 [0 R
- t9 l: N7 w0 b$ @- \* ], b1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit! f; s# E' Z9 U S# y
: _ R3 {% n: z3 u2 m1 g E# K
1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit; A1 A2 e9 A$ m4 U/ W
- ^( r& V5 l* z8 h- Y0 Q
1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit
" ~, ~4 P( c6 B. w% L5 {' n+ N+ \: ]& t( e* |
1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit
0 A9 R$ N8 Q! J8 g2 _- z- X! u5 M: v+ u) \; c: u5 H/ g
1994-95: $938 million surplus+ ^0 d! V$ s) _/ P
4 |% [0 |7 q! P" r/ V+ [
1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus9 ]0 y9 y/ `3 c0 p) I5 b3 e0 \
1 a. p5 n9 p" L" x" i, P" e v1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus
/ l. b8 v. J! ]* ~( l: N7 G+ e+ N5 v6 J& r( c
1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus, w" y2 M% S. r3 A( K& A. T/ t2 U
( v/ B( {. K: ?" t& l" x D7 H& G. J
1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus$ ~ c3 s/ b* n1 |( g
& Z6 [ L: C. R( J; t! v
1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus
3 J: I/ z" U3 V2 B2 W
* Y2 Z0 f: |, T* S6 m2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus
5 Z3 W4 }( O& Q. |4 w+ D+ `, F
2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus
8 J s3 M4 K) z9 \9 p
! Q2 w+ P, e, ~+ n) K$ m7 e7 @6 L) c* R2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus
) u8 f7 V: y- X3 F' n5 i9 [2 Z8 h
: D8 m" Y8 n0 K4 Z) |2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus
9 E7 ]# h* C' J1 p/ a
, ^% w t# m. ~+ o" ^, D+ U2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus
/ Q" A2 M1 O: s2 g
+ X8 @( O) W. z! `2 F2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus y/ v9 p( b' s: i+ p8 o
* B: u3 E9 U9 a; V ~) U2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus# b7 y ~& \- q. q5 N0 ?, T
. H' f) e! S/ \; X* K; i2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus0 f( w+ n0 E5 F4 [6 p8 J- L4 b
! U, |! ~% o5 U+ n1 A9 m8 ^1 r2008-09: $852 million deficit
- ~; O& F' U& p% m' D" q4 o) H0 `8 Q% C
2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit
# n, E8 v; s, S- @
: D. p# @; \0 _9 \3 |2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit7 b. S4 w. M; a
* u$ L }3 R R2011-12: $23 million deficit7 Y( F. a; m. m* H7 d8 Y! y. v9 A
' M _' z" }* n1 k/ P& S2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit
& ?% A/ A: d; m; G" N ^
1 b: Z2 b8 q5 F* g" W$ G- [8 B2 w% h2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|