 鲜花( 332)  鸡蛋( 23)
|
本帖最后由 一盎司饭 于 2015-10-5 13:53 编辑 1 g( R8 r+ T& d, _
peterpan 发表于 2015-10-5 12:38
3 T8 N3 Q2 i5 V: j/ w/ t+ @1. 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?7 N' v" v) g* t8 z% R7 R' f) W! _) t
2. 我之前也说过了,不要老拿低油 ... # w# v. G5 H6 K+ H% Y! w4 o! R* c
; M( ^7 m; ?' F7 t4 J
你想问“为什么PC有盈余”,答案很简单,就两个字:& S9 O8 F, S% R0 z, }/ w M/ L% a
Ralph Klein
8 h' m4 i9 U% N! K8 C3 t% F$ M
) I& u& V5 g! \* }$ m6 O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!, ]6 Y* S$ R6 R
/ O+ o, h& Q% q) P3 F
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。- V; d9 w, _* Z* U! g
g) N& @1 k* {" U% ?- g' z; ]( D2 C1 p
+ {9 t, s" O$ C! t9 Y7 n3 _8 B1 V' K t& M
http://www.edmontonsun.com/2015/ ... it-in-three-decades
k6 P- X0 z3 f' |4 X6 R$ iHistoric Alberta budget balances:) v0 \9 f$ T" P+ n1 y
* `4 X8 q9 T& g0 r0 a D
1981-82: $2.133 billion surplus. @+ i2 j- @6 b$ V) m
- x, ~1 M9 R/ z2 \; M2 A
1982-83: $796 million deficit0 `" y& c9 I. v
4 |/ b) ^: J7 K; q
1983-84: $129 million surplus y. k, T# a' {' w" G
6 V; u$ d% A! V* T" h! V* v1984-85: $1.245 billion surplus
; p' X" z: j, l2 h+ H# F, j6 H6 l. N. F; r- G/ s& O/ T6 B
1985-86: $761 million deficit
: ^+ o, C9 n; V, K( N7 `- _. q- n8 c2 F: M. z! Q2 Z
1986-87: $4.033 billion deficit
* k/ P9 D' j- C: p# U3 \- b' S' M9 o( C8 T6 b7 _& D* q" F! q
1987-88: $1.365 billion deficit% y" c' a8 y% c( ^% N
8 L! m+ _: z' W! y1 y- N
1988-89: $2.007 billion deficit7 q7 b8 ^) G" B. P( V
& P# f& @' m6 B4 m( N! d# w7 ?1989-90: $2.116 billion deficit/ h4 N( J' I/ F+ P# ?4 n% a) ]
6 O( X$ m1 @* k* x; A$ j6 ]. W/ }1990-91: $1.831 billion deficit$ X- C* h7 o, ~' `
( R2 f b3 q7 z1 A; w
1991-92: $2.629 billion deficit
7 ]' B8 X1 s3 F: @+ s
. J$ b: j( \' e0 f/ @: X1992-93: $3.324 billion deficit
# i; _1 y/ @2 M7 m- Q! {2 t2 b3 r W$ p- T1 S6 N) \) v) {. @7 v) C% Z
1993-94: $1.371 billion deficit
; J) L+ A7 R" l8 L8 o5 D% q. b7 P) S1 R d) q, |' T
1994-95: $938 million surplus
5 S! ]& ~/ @8 _. p8 X. _3 \6 X u: z- x( o$ S) c1 G1 i# c
1995-96: $1.151 billion surplus7 K% x: E' _1 E. |) J6 s
$ |) f7 R+ i, {$ u7 U% T, P1996-97: $2.489 billion surplus% o. S% M- s# b. V- o
8 G; ]- X9 ~$ W0 E( T
1997-98: $2.659 billion surplus
8 m1 E) w$ `- W8 |9 J5 _ d$ E1 V. c+ C, x
1998-99: $1.094 billion surplus/ U) i( L/ p# Q0 d% W
( W" s8 T! D0 k, X: ]* ?# A6 S) u1999-00: $2.791 billion surplus
% m: {4 e$ t/ c' F3 b! t" P
- X% m* }+ r+ z& M2 |2000-01: $6.571 billion surplus& |+ M/ U, T+ ~& e
/ v* m/ U4 {$ N! ^" K% U
2001-02: $1.081 billion surplus
* l/ ` i, x3 y- O* ?7 Y3 A
" \2 l$ ?, Z/ g4 |8 L; Q0 ^- E2002-03: $2.133 billion surplus; o) f F% }4 L, y5 o8 d [
1 C* B7 K8 y2 D( [- Y
2003-04: $4.136 billion surplus" p6 f' } G, D6 k. U( L+ r; U
8 P& K/ d( W) d2004-05: $5.175 billion surplus
2 Z- e( G9 q" }3 C9 C" l# b+ {5 @5 M
2005-06: $8.551 billion surplus
3 C7 i( T! } `: z6 ?3 Y. M
8 S4 t* {# B) E( a8 e9 G( k2006-07: $8.510 billion surplus
$ {; u* I* {) j3 k" c, r
: J" X/ j) j* b* B2007-08: $4.581 billion surplus
" i3 `9 Y# r/ z4 q' c; g) y \& e$ |3 t: ]/ L! F
2008-09: $852 million deficit% {- J1 h9 }; E6 i
/ @& R3 K: d" ]. z2009-10: $1.032 billion deficit# U& j% i3 S( @5 K: B
+ a$ O5 F* K5 j7 K, M0 u$ h
2010-11: $3.410 billion deficit; c5 W3 u4 ?! G
1 X3 \. ]. @5 l0 J+ ^ D M
2011-12: $23 million deficit1 n. P, P( H9 |& A& m% ^5 m
4 `$ y9 K( ]5 i& {7 X" D/ p: A2 z
2012-13: $2.842 billion deficit
$ |) L0 i* n9 x' G h( p
' _! p: a2 O. Z" P3 J$ n2013-14: $302 million deficit |
|