首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
职业资格
The medical community owes economists a great deal. Amartya Sen won a Nobel Prize for Economic Sciences in 1998. He has spent hi
The medical community owes economists a great deal. Amartya Sen won a Nobel Prize for Economic Sciences in 1998. He has spent hi
admin
2015-03-27
60
问题
The medical community owes economists a great deal. Amartya Sen won a Nobel Prize for Economic Sciences in 1998. He has spent his entire career promulgating ideas of justice and freedom, with health rarely out of his gaze. Joseph Stiglitz won a Noble in 2001. In 1998, when he was chief economist at the (then) notoriously regressive World Bank, he famously challenged the Washington Consensus. And Jeff Sachs, a controversial figure to some critics, can fairly lay claim to the enormous achievement of putting health at the center of the Millennium Development Goals. His "Commission on Macroeconomics and Health" was a landmark report, providing explicit evidence to explain why attacking disease was absolutely necessary if poverty was to be eradicated. And I must offer my own personal gratitude to a very special group of economists—Larry Summers, Dean Jamison, Kenneth Arrow, David Evans, and Sanjeev Gupta. They were the economic team that drove the work of Global Health 2035.
But although we might be kind to economists, perhaps we should be tougher on the discipline of economics itself. For economics has much to answer for. Pick up any economics textbook, and you will see the priority given to markets and efficiency, price and utility, profit and competition. These words have chilling effects on our quest for better health. They seem to marginalize those qualities of our lives that we value most of all—not our self-interest, but our humanity; not the costs and benefits of monetary exchange, but vision and ideals that guide our decisions. It was these issues that were addressed at last week’s Global Health Lab, held at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.
Anne Mills, Vice-Director of the School, fervently argued the case in favor of economists. It was they who contributed to understanding the idea of "best-buys" in global health. It was economists who challenged user fees. And it was economists who made the connection between health and economic growth, providing one of the most compelling political arguments for taking health seriously. Some economists might adore markets, but not health economists, she said. "Health care is different." For her kind of economist, a health system is a "social institution that embodies the values of society".
Although competition has a part to play in health, it should be used judiciously as a mechanism to improve the quality of care. Chris Whitty, Chief Scientific Adviser at the UK’s Department for International Development, expressed his contempt for those who profess indifference to economics. Economics is about the efficient allocation of scarce resources. Anyone who backed the inefficient allocation of resources is "immoral". He did criticize economists for their arrogance, though. Economists seemed to believe their ideas should be accepted simply because of the authority they held as economists. Economics, he said, is only one science among many that policy makers have to take into account. But Clare Chandler, a medical anthropologist, took a different view. She asked, what has neoliberal economics ever done for global health? Her answer, in one word, was "inequality". Neoliberal economics frames the way we think and act. Her argument suggested that any economic philosophy that put a premium on free trade, privatization, minimal government, and reduced public spending on social and health sectors is a philosophy bereft of human virtue. The discussion that followed, led by Martin McKee, posed difficult questions. Why do economists pay such little attention to inequality? Why do economists treat their theories like religions? Why are economists so silent on their own failures? Can economics ever be apolitical? There were few satisfactory answers to these questions.
Which of the following best describes the author’s attitude toward economists?
选项
A、Contempt.
B、Reservation.
C、Detachment.
D、Endorsement.
答案
C
解析
作者对经济学家的态度是比较客观的。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/DrCv777K
本试题收录于:
英语学科知识与教学能力题库教师资格分类
0
英语学科知识与教学能力
教师资格
相关试题推荐
阅读下面材料,回答问题。材料一越南战争使美国的政界、军界高层在后来进行战争决策时“形成一种新的共识:美国只应把动用军事力量作为最后一种手段;只有当美国国家利益明显受到影响时方可这样做:只有当获得公众强有力的支持时才能这样做;只有在有可能相对较快地以较小代
下面是某教师在讲述《近代中国资本主义的曲折发展》一课的教学片段:(在完成基本知识的学习之后)师:我们如何简明地呈现“近代中国民族资本主义的曲折发展历程”呢?生1:用知识表解的方式(教师引导和帮助学生完成)师:还有哪些别的方式来呈现呢?生2:用文本
Ateacherhandedoutalistoftwenty"if"sentencesandaskedstudentstodiscussandfindoutthegrammaticalrules.What’sth
IndianEnglishisa______varietyoftheEnglishlanguage.
Questioningplaysanimportantrolefortheclassroomteaching.Whichofthefollowingquestionsdoesnotbelongtocomprehensio
Thehighpricesforcorn—whiledrivinghungerinAfrica—haveencouragedotherfarmersto______landfromwheat,soybeans,oreven
Inthecollege-admissionswars,weparentsarethetruefighters.We’repushingourkidstogetgoodgrades,takeSATpreparator
Whenateacherintendstopresentorexplainanewlanguagepoint,whichofthefollowinggroupingmethodsismostlyrecommended
Whenateacherintendstopresentorexplainanewlanguagepoint,whichofthefollowinggroupingmethodsismostlyrecommended
ForgetCyclists,PedestriansareRealDangerWearehavingadebateaboutthistopic.Herearesomelettersfromourreaders.-
随机试题
Thereseemstobeno_______totheusesofcomputers.
男性,25岁。1型糖尿病患者。平时每日注射胰岛素总量60U。近1周来因胰岛素用完而停用胰岛素治疗。乏力2天,昏迷4小时入院。在下列处理中哪项是错误的
下列各项中。年度终了需要转入“利润分配——未分配利润”科目的有()。
在证券市场上,公司回购股票的动机有()。
根据票据法律制度的规定,下列有关票据上的签章的表述中,正确的是()。
下列选项中,属于行政法规的是()。
共感、共情、同理心又称为(),是建立良好心理辅导关系的促进条件。
你对基层人民警察工作是如何认识的?
对24名儿童的智商进行了配对,得到了3个分组,智力水平分别为高、中、低,每个组的儿童又随机分为两组,分别采用两种方法学习九连环,一种是完全讲授式,教师重复地讲解游戏玩法;另一种是互动式,教师讲完一遍后让儿童自己摸索,学习时间相等。问两种学习方法的效果有无差
Whilebigcorporations______globalbusinessnews,smallcompaniesarechargingintooverseasmarketsatafasterpace.
最新回复
(
0
)