 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑
# S0 I, @5 d6 J
' H# X* l8 U8 C1 P# e
; S: Y& I/ a$ h8 q# m9 t5 ^& I8 Y0 Q1 J你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:
1 M8 @4 d G% J# ?Ralph Klein+ w6 d9 ~, C; R$ R# L6 ?, W5 I' Y
9 V9 {- x; r8 Q3 w# C# X+ b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! o q# A9 A( s# `* n
% U7 B5 B6 Y: j* X) @ D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 t7 \1 |; C9 ^, b
* n* g' K( ]. i: @
# a9 ?6 {8 k1 g% C, P8 d" f
b- \; D: k7 x, T- T) chttp://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades$ c" O: Y' K0 o6 Q
Historic Alberta budget balances:$ E3 r0 e" x- Y7 K' R& n
5 V5 o' O$ B9 O4 Z8 D# s+ N
1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus u" w5 H1 j- o" e
. g$ ^% I+ ~9 Z% h1982-83: $796 million deficit, _; ~1 y5 F2 T' x6 U
" v2 t- I) r5 }* ?1 v1983-84: $129 million surplus
; [" j) p' ?; s& d: V) ]$ L# L+ `( e6 l6 g; o4 T
1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus
1 j1 v+ Y; R8 M: u! @5 P9 y: \8 u! \5 }1 Q( n6 Z
1985-86: $761 million deficit* D) s F' @. k3 q
$ Q) P; u1 C6 \2 N/ y" N1 t y X
1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit4 t* h- f+ t2 U( T, U% b
" v3 k4 g8 U' j/ M9 n3 U7 n
1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit
/ Q, P& u0 Y3 p
2 P/ K7 _! R( ~$ p8 @8 \1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit
2 s( T) ]) w% v! O: K; O& I
7 _; F# E. u# L2 W/ A/ N1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit) J4 [' E* }4 e' @1 U0 Z
# ^9 n7 `% h5 w
1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit
* [' ^' l, q$ x* r5 T. k w* ~4 y' W! N, S
1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit6 y5 K% i9 n, }, f
0 [% b' r/ s# L' s* \1 E' L: h1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit# ]( r5 [. `7 \. M- r3 _; @
( o& N. C* h7 x5 p: d/ m' |1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit, T* e2 Z( e5 F& F- U, Q
+ K+ q* W; y4 e1994-95: $938 million surplus$ A: L, D$ ^6 u; I' N
+ o) L- ~* t; p9 H. A( T1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus
/ H! i; c" {: r! A7 H; [% d# \
$ C4 `7 \1 S, U6 V9 g0 R1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus
- x* {4 U1 D6 V' y0 J4 y
: }# g, m! J' V7 s, u$ W6 H0 ?1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus- ~+ J5 A/ ^" m
2 m9 Z9 y& r: Q" ]% H1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus
! @/ a& K1 e' W5 }% j/ c, Y3 \
5 M6 |) t$ l- t3 `& v1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus
: j! u- w1 d8 X$ w* _3 J6 c: B m7 [) S/ {* {$ N- x- A6 w3 P5 W
2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus) n( k$ D3 G& ]$ y, s+ I$ \
' E$ C3 Q7 N, w
2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus7 ^' _4 O9 Z9 q. c/ K. M8 f
! K4 C% r1 |" c4 N# ]2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus$ l2 y" }# \3 J+ {1 H$ q1 j8 m
8 K; V& z5 r7 ~$ a0 p5 N& x
2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus# G: x. z. `3 e6 g
: i* W; X6 ~# r6 }( l
2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus. K! y; B' }5 T4 P8 k* @0 @
6 N' }+ L# |+ a7 q- M9 ^' C4 u
2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus
. g" Y# j, o# P: b0 I6 S% m' X1 L
2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus
" L3 P' s$ L: g9 H
4 A; f3 Y! X# a( {2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus$ g8 l K* i& Q% v- r
2 T) B0 D. @' }2008-09: $852 million deficit
8 q8 z. T' w% a/ y5 @" M' F/ B; v2 v6 N9 t, s0 R
2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit9 H, e7 k* E5 G- c o! b. s: k
1 L- }; W! i H6 W* u, w# `
2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit
5 V8 R5 c% Z, `0 S+ R+ M2 ^
, n2 @7 b2 u% a8 a4 _9 D C2011-12: $23 million deficit
- E B# P1 k0 L/ E7 P
3 g0 A9 c$ Z5 z7 s" Z! W/ _) e2 _2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit8 \+ D2 R& H) O
) z- a6 P8 W1 J
2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|