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
78
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。以下是某老师设计的教学活动,请结合网络和历史教学的关系对此教学活动加以评析。2005年,在庆祝世界反法西斯战争胜利60周年纪念的时候,网络上不仅有大量当年的珍贵历史资料,而且有很多“二战”历史反思、回顾,以及60周年纪念活动的新
Whenastudenthasmadeasentence"IborrowedapaperfromMissLi",theteachers;"Doyoumeanapieceofpaper?"Herethet
设计任务:根据所提供信息和语言素材设计一节说写课的教学方案。该方案应突出下列要点:teachingobjectivesteachingcontentskeyanddifficultpointsma
Ateacherhandedoutalistoftwenty"if"sentencesandaskedstudentstodiscussandfindoutthegrammaticalrules.What’sth
WhichofthefollowingfeaturesisNOTexhibitedbythedeductivemethod?
UnlessyouspendmuchtimesittinginacollegeclassroomorbrowsingthroughcertainareasoftheInternet,it’spossiblethat
IndianEnglishisa______varietyoftheEnglishlanguage.
AnneWhitney,asophomoreatColoradoStateUniversity,firsthadaproblemtakingtestswhenshebegancollege."Iwasalwaysw
Theclassroomteachingenvironmentconsistsofclassroomenvironmentand______.
—Ibegyoutoquitsmoking.Ican’treally______thatsmell.—I’mextremelysorrytohearthat.
随机试题
“扼制点”
未曾接种卡介苗的3岁以下儿童,结核菌素试验阳性提示
下列雕塑中,属于重庆大足石刻的是()。
彤彤行为主动性比较差,但自制力很强,不怕困难,忍耐力高,表现出内刚外柔的特点,其气质类型属于()。
注重学生的情感、责任和人生价值,有利于建立和谐师生关系。这是对()课程论的评价。
5,4.5,13.5,16.5,()
【B1】【B6】
Choosethecorrectletter,A,BorC.Themoneythatthemarketersmadecontributestolocal
BalancingCollegeLifeandAcademics1.ControlYourSchedule;Don’tLetYourScheduleControlYouOrganizationandtimeman
A、Toinvitethemantojointhem.B、ToaskthemantohelpherpreparethedinnerC、Tosuggestpolitelythatthemanshouldgoa
最新回复
(
0
)