 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑
$ c' p4 v$ V( `
# V( V! ?1 S) e- w" a' S# D9 r" W% n$ b& C. l2 x; m
你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:
$ i/ k& t0 C0 VRalph Klein
; Y! w2 q% O z' d9 _0 q1 c1 c
0 P6 l7 W" G9 V2 L. K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!
. c% P5 `% Q% d5 g1 E" c$ Q
) x$ \" x' O9 n* S, I. c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。8 R8 F" B. ` W9 P" X
! v) I7 {2 @% |: w' `7 R4 h
& F. ]" E. D6 T l( c S: O
. x# n0 I* Y! v' s& B) b, m9 z! Nhttp://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades7 j" w Q8 x d' @$ j
Historic Alberta budget balances:& n+ L# d Q8 m& F" c7 u
/ L6 _4 N& \) M6 I& v- b
1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus
! q8 L, t( F# z4 D; }$ g
; C$ N0 N+ d4 t: y1982-83: $796 million deficit
1 I3 M5 Z/ e2 i$ z& m5 {
% N1 `4 i" v1 m# V1983-84: $129 million surplus) b) I+ b) D. o) w) H z/ d) ^1 S9 Z
% w- P- v9 o0 n' G0 ^$ r
1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus
! h* m( W; e- V/ {/ d) f
: A& l8 i* F; W$ c1985-86: $761 million deficit e+ a: B8 h. }; ]& a
, ~1 I7 O, {; K2 }1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit+ t: ^7 `2 @2 q# s! N/ {
( V# s9 n, c+ q3 |& V1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit! @* w& \, I s# \+ C
4 Z+ p9 G+ K8 P: h4 ]* e
1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit- s* B5 e) w* v4 C
+ P" h# L ^# y" d! H( R
1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit! ?( _7 R# e* r Y5 M5 p
! J7 Y" U3 n5 \7 n$ y& E- D1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit) W# M3 w$ y- O0 t: w& T
4 ?! i) h) {6 E. v% A7 Z1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit
; A4 q- R8 V, s: U! ]% K9 s8 G5 d6 n) ~9 s4 p4 Z
1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit
5 C# d& `# E, o/ O' p( N- ?7 P2 Z; p9 \4 u
1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit. M' m" B) e' g# I: A5 q6 Z
0 O: [0 u9 Y- c1 L4 n2 m1994-95: $938 million surplus) U$ }/ w9 s: {- b
! l5 c7 _- F3 A E5 Z$ f/ G7 b1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus
! Z. [3 m5 @# z
! x2 p0 T/ D; `* ^1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus
3 B* G: x( v# R/ B5 h/ b. m; @) I* W+ q6 Q& o. z
1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus$ a* k0 _* z/ a
% W; R* k, K ]1 q: \0 ?1 ^& L1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus
; Y: T% z+ h+ D1 H- e
2 W- l! Y" S2 A. i2 I1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus
7 a* P4 c4 k) \7 T* S3 L$ J6 ~# C* i
2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus
. O" Z' b2 k+ t! P% f: E+ s) D: z( r3 C+ d
2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus
- _! M+ Q# o! v/ J
. h, q/ H* x o/ O$ @- I& a2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus
0 d1 }+ g1 o' r0 m; u3 u% u
- f$ k y$ v2 m2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus# i1 F' z/ u) M( V; p' N
$ N" U) J ^2 T5 E0 @
2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus7 d) `3 D0 t2 Q; v: d) T
9 ]9 F; Z7 T0 L+ Q! e, J" Y2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus4 l- |" w5 S$ A; u
. G- [' g+ v# W1 y ]/ p
2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus7 q) @- `5 z( @5 J1 A# b" P K' Q
3 j+ y+ r3 B) w* V; f: U
2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus8 p) R3 k7 e# C: E9 t
2 b+ I. ^' S9 `; l2008-09: $852 million deficit& S% T8 V$ o2 _8 C0 z
3 x- f( T1 y% j z
2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit
4 C3 |' d4 O+ W4 u2 r F, B% Z9 [: V1 S |# @2 R* e7 {# M1 l
2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit
9 n! Q, u( ~% E- N! G2 f* @% o" _+ O* ?" _% Z$ x, w6 B' a0 r6 T
2011-12: $23 million deficit
7 ] d2 p0 V" i; `3 {7 `
7 H- e6 m4 j7 d. r2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit
4 q' ?5 a9 S& v
! x. d8 C, s8 x. {$ x Q9 X i( o* M2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|