 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑 ! t( f) b/ `6 K6 Q" m0 P" }
, X# w( y- K# X
5 }+ r' X( {7 l0 \. ^. f' i7 _) X; N
你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:
k- x g- |# V/ V2 K) s W. p+ \Ralph Klein% O* b) C$ ~" _% U( T
$ y5 u3 q( o) j! g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!. H( Y2 P; X: v" X) z7 C8 l
1 ^# p: i5 r" J2 i) g% K
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 x) w% ?7 D+ j- g
* @9 w% A1 t# B
( q; y; b! e0 ^4 F% p5 d
, D2 Y2 v+ |! [6 |http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades
2 }9 K3 ~( R& `# ^Historic Alberta budget balances:
2 D4 M) f4 M8 q( {( j. z" l! z0 i6 v+ E; p1 R
1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus
8 B6 w2 A8 e; [
* n6 Z9 [" h$ S: ]$ j1982-83: $796 million deficit/ n, M8 U2 M# A- |* `; O4 z
h- l" f( i. [% {3 B( m1983-84: $129 million surplus$ l/ f* i4 d- [+ T
) v5 |$ G; L R" I* Z( c
1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus0 N1 _+ E4 J6 _
' a0 n' s# d" T5 F1985-86: $761 million deficit9 \2 H' w& r( i* T" X9 S7 C, n
; ~9 |; S8 D' H
1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit3 S1 h2 y _. p4 j4 W+ f
" a: y! |8 V Y S& z2 E% Z
1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit
% D8 i; D: d& w% D, T2 B( P `
1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit: u% R/ x+ h9 ?
; o. O3 C0 O9 S# c9 ~& u) d1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit
: c5 ]! j0 k. q( l1 [! h3 |
+ V" W6 i- {4 ?4 c1 f# H1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit
* q& L9 Y1 Z5 Z) A% o5 G/ F( C% _: x: V% v" I7 v2 F
1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit8 z& `% ~! X$ i P$ l k4 P# H. \9 r
- {9 |- J9 o$ h" H( @
1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit
# a1 ?: `" t. X) ~* a' U) S7 w4 X+ n, O; o6 ^" X
1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit
$ C- u+ l/ D( n
* H% x+ j4 q5 v/ o+ s1994-95: $938 million surplus! |( j! b0 ]% l- c8 _
" R3 w& A! G9 G/ U" H1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus" l: X8 i0 D( E( r4 z5 Y7 H. j
( B' y- [& {1 h5 Z+ E( E0 w
1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus& C6 `8 A( y; }; ~, [ {& \
$ T$ y! S) D1 }1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus- L ^0 n' @5 t. x5 P# c
( a' A3 R3 b/ ? |1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus
X. e3 X! d- p8 ~! S$ F
( H% Y2 ~3 G f- M; j1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus
+ r+ a r, ?' q- B1 T) I |5 C8 T* x# O1 @2 r: U( H
2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus
" k6 |, Y% W. Q& J- Y5 v5 b, @/ g3 x1 U, {, ?. T
2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus
. T" }" a3 `3 Q$ g G- ]; ?# I5 [$ i: L; T9 ~
2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus
2 a" P) p0 m* I# C+ ^
5 Z5 ~$ L, x; _2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus
/ J o! {- a, g3 @; V
4 f; P( m4 D/ I) Q/ W2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus3 v7 A* D5 Y8 h# C9 X+ A
! F. X. p/ E. ]5 o5 X& W0 j! M
2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus: |* h5 Y1 O: E3 d: b( G+ E
# z" M$ q" M! k& N7 t0 ?$ K L, U2 F$ k2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus3 E! P: N/ N' h8 k4 s" [* B
3 F* ^) o; b' {$ s0 h/ G2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus0 a/ q9 q5 {: N, `2 r/ ` C' I
1 p S5 Q0 F7 L, |& O. T2008-09: $852 million deficit
/ X& L! t- u- w! s b8 ^
' |4 K4 z" b1 D6 Q2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit+ ]" w; K5 t9 `
9 f4 F6 b" Y2 h8 F+ r; x
2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit
, g2 e0 f1 m1 `7 E" Z2 A* M; a4 q+ h; { l
2011-12: $23 million deficit+ t+ z$ m5 R: W+ {' [" T& m+ q
/ d6 F3 m% C% z: n4 G2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit$ u6 r: L) c7 ~; p0 z
: p; [6 A3 f7 ~+ L
2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|