 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑
! F4 J5 D2 `$ X/ e8 o1 Z& Tpeterpan 发表于 2015-10-5 12:38
$ k# T0 k. W! v) F* x6 p1. 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?* @- Q) V O2 b+ y6 j* T2 e; G
2. 我之前也说过了,不要老拿低油 ...
! z& o' i2 d- c' n6 R3 A6 Y" f4 @
你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:4 k8 B. O; W+ t% |$ M% W% n2 O
Ralph Klein4 n* K6 ^$ ~# w5 S+ {) [; `
6 j- e; O7 N# o. R9 y E, i/ @4 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!8 Z5 y1 Z5 l q8 l o
2 ~- k" u, f8 N, 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。
4 P0 ?3 T4 M; a/ F/ D( s. D% v3 k r- @, n2 I4 m# _" i$ @
; _, m7 V$ k% \" `9 z5 l; n( j2 @& T% e" Q9 G( F, e, [" M
http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades8 k! Q& i+ R! T" j8 l# i% ?0 y
Historic Alberta budget balances:: k2 @% I$ ]7 H( z- w7 A$ k
3 f2 m1 A; {: l1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus
9 R7 \( N/ T/ k$ X4 f
& K; W) `- c6 H' b1982-83: $796 million deficit$ z: v& Z" c& M- s1 T) I
) k3 @* F# J* J6 l8 K `1983-84: $129 million surplus, o7 p* W9 u2 ]- _+ E* t
+ ]6 v8 n. H% U6 [( ]5 [1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus
6 b' R& c3 e2 w3 p
" H# V# _/ Z7 ^" }. n+ X/ j& M# l1985-86: $761 million deficit5 M+ _) l9 {6 {% _4 [, b
( j4 X( H; I' }6 Z9 A* Y2 z' n+ Y7 Z1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit
: a% c& i/ A% E, U. V) l3 l8 I
c, l7 @( f" J1 C( V7 k- K1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit
0 K" v& n, |& E: w1 I- ?
9 S) o3 k" s0 t7 G1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit
6 C( j9 z: `3 G8 D+ S( R' } M
$ ~0 K. X9 V: H' `9 _5 `, n1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit2 X7 w0 u8 F2 e$ e* K4 `" H: ]
6 ?9 `7 t$ Q" M: ?0 }. Y3 ?1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit
! T. w7 v* b: _
( u' P% o* b2 z1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit1 r: c3 [5 h& [1 |( Y& A) j
) d# e, `( D* |' l0 K
1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit
: G- v# b0 m" S4 I3 n& H
2 P e, j8 y( ^" p5 l. W1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit2 u L3 J0 ?# S# o; ?
1 O1 A; c& l0 d
1994-95: $938 million surplus1 e. z4 H7 A) H$ a
# w6 x' H; x. w/ H1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus
" K$ C0 } e8 L6 C6 `( X0 W. w, N: g9 Y/ k) O$ ^
1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus
# `( c l5 Z* J9 C9 l
) V# A* Y$ ~# k1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus+ b; }- {, T. w" a H: R
3 i) D$ T$ K1 X2 a, f5 G
1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus
. m" h4 E* `! y# Z& g; R3 ^# d6 N5 K9 b2 z" I
1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus, m- O8 S/ R; w% ~
2 g4 V1 \9 \; Q" @# { J5 n% A2 D( F# m
2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus
) V" f- f4 b& k Z1 a
d- a% l& D, p8 }! |6 [, p4 O2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus
5 f. I/ ^* v5 f- N9 I
7 j+ W4 x3 i, g' r2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus
3 t& G2 U. E4 N: q7 u9 ~( ^0 q. k/ Z- ~( V
2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus
$ z1 | O7 k7 V9 ?4 P8 t' s; b% {! r3 V4 `2 Q! U. Y6 v
2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus
+ A$ B+ S/ v; H, i8 \
2 u% _. W0 X W: E2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus
! a1 O! L- U7 {% S5 v( e( Y2 Q
+ W' [- d" d9 ^& ^. Z2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus
$ J. e. J' g+ z) O* \4 o0 n* l" H' u* C' p/ n. s; h$ n
2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus+ \4 k% d% p3 y( C! x; u3 q3 j! _
. \. Q& k- O5 y3 R
2008-09: $852 million deficit
2 z$ I5 d6 G: K" X# _% J) k1 F0 d
/ p& b' Y) F& l6 q8 x* p3 t2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit
8 t- s( h+ {* J r8 i
* E, x Q& l e( E" {5 N2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit
7 n0 n+ k/ y* G# |1 }# U* n. e! Y" _( S7 o, G' c
2011-12: $23 million deficit" a$ E0 Z2 `# W- v+ O) F
. v! _" d+ ?) l: Y" z: \ o: }7 R7 \
2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit7 v; q3 @- }% C2 w! D
: v+ M5 P' q3 K I# e" |! _' u4 ~2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|