 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑
. z) ?8 z/ J; Y) B! g/ Qpeterpan 发表于 2015-10-5 12:38
% G% K, A& |" b5 c/ z m" t1. 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?
3 K" \# p3 V" i1 A# W. H2 I2. 我之前也说过了,不要老拿低油 ... 5 k/ r6 m2 q& |' p: A; `
, O2 N( p& Y' g4 }
你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:
$ m: d, R4 {5 K$ hRalph Klein% Z+ T9 \8 o2 ~/ `. X+ \0 e
1 U) Z& F v0 a. r7 u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!) _% E; b( a# ^/ d. f/ X
8 Y; s8 }0 \& w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。2 K9 }* O" E3 I" ~0 S
' Q! k1 E: u" s& a- \( w3 d& \4 @" o" H" v' `+ I w3 o6 L H
! [: m+ |/ r8 F. Khttp://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades. h& I3 Z- o+ ^& D. A0 H* ]
Historic Alberta budget balances:. i) r% D8 [: O2 P3 W
, K# u7 g' T5 u" s1 H! @0 ^
1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus
2 a: N0 m+ G2 i8 K! R" X
- f& J; b9 ~* c1982-83: $796 million deficit
: M3 B) n" w( n6 j) {8 y
; }, i6 _. l. k- J/ h: Q8 C# h1983-84: $129 million surplus
& x: o! z* J3 O; r) |* e, Z2 V/ p3 |! R; b
1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus p! N- Q) a' \% M. `
( q9 j* L/ w: {, j% V1985-86: $761 million deficit' d- C- x7 O9 G
$ M$ e/ N1 t' T& V. J
1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit. |! E" J9 U* C C
, W4 }1 y" C. G; b' @/ J2 j/ |1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit. n* }/ `9 S+ X0 c. w3 A
, Q) T# W0 `: L6 z' ]# W a
1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit
% \$ i) { a& e7 G+ M \
) Z/ b" @ X) @7 y. L. @5 ~$ |1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit7 Q$ e7 `/ ?2 e& o" G) ]9 E
/ S$ J. l f5 `' M& }$ o; t1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit
% s) X+ ?0 ~ W# g
$ o! D1 G2 n9 b H! ~1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit
4 j& ~- ]" o4 W, B
$ S' W I" b! ?$ c+ f" ]1 W# z1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit
/ A0 N3 |/ x$ \0 O7 t: `2 P7 b1 o& F4 |' q
1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit
. c& P6 W+ T/ d3 A1 z3 @8 K
V/ @, u H$ t1994-95: $938 million surplus
. B2 {4 l: P: O% w3 z$ ~% u' f( [9 e
1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus
: ]! q2 ^" A6 E4 d% x u) Q4 s! m0 @
- J) Q% p- W5 @. |1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus. }* W. Z) P: Q* s, |: I1 F
+ o8 ?1 _/ M+ U5 y$ c) p' j1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus
, o, x L$ l: `9 Q% B/ m5 X- o' D. u, ^ Y) d
1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus
, C. J; p c& c& v9 h+ A5 B2 q
1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus5 o0 e3 N! G( x# ^
b% g" w0 J0 P* P# o2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus+ L7 G* }: v. C' I) K
( W7 Y" r& j# V, t, n7 t2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus1 b0 Y8 r; D! o% _8 T U8 A/ J$ y, z
3 o$ f+ g/ D, e8 L# H- M+ R$ n; m: L
2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus
9 F9 a1 E! E/ h7 X8 K5 H6 z% O4 ~* _% H) ^
2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus
/ X# b1 h! h. m' L4 s7 [* L) e3 t6 {3 d. C4 ~2 H
2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus
5 O; D. R+ x! ?9 }( y
$ |, x) R4 Q- c: w2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus5 ~9 {0 f8 l! E0 M4 P3 a8 x
% Z% `3 c) f4 r5 L, R5 i/ Q+ B
2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus6 o4 K# A! E1 H, r$ @8 G1 [* h
( b) B; I# d" m+ o% n7 H* ?2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus: p* d: X G3 O k% M- k
9 t; D( J" D* ]) @* u9 d2008-09: $852 million deficit9 `+ v+ ~4 k0 } B
3 A6 p: I- F1 Q! T! U8 R2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit
9 a% \# I+ V3 s, q" y( v3 p5 R. z& @$ O! ]! v( `. j' ^
2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit" W- W! y8 B( f
- y; X. `* r9 ]2 l' \/ L2011-12: $23 million deficit
0 Y8 T# ~+ q0 c- U$ D
3 ^+ S4 @& Y0 U4 p2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit
9 F1 S$ _9 e( x) V9 v9 ]4 P. \; X8 ~& x1 w4 j* e# X& N
2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|