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
100
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 is the closest in meaning to "discipline" in PARAGRPH 2?
选项
A、Subject.
B、Lesson.
C、Punishment.
D、Regulation.
答案
A
解析
discipline在此处指的是一门学科,故选subject。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/PrCv777K
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
Whenastudenthasmadeasentence"IborrowedapaperfromMissLi",theteachers;"Doyoumeanapieceofpaper?"Herethet
Whichofthefollowingisanaccuracy-orientedspeakingactivity?
Thephoneme/n/inthefirstwordofallthefollowingphraseschangesto/m/except______.
IndianEnglishisa______varietyoftheEnglishlanguage.
根据提供的信息和语言素材设计教学方案。用英文作答。设计任务:请阅读下面学生信息和语言素材,设计一节英语阅读课的教学方案。教案没有固定格式.但须包含下列要点:teachingobjectivesteachingcontent
AnneWhitney,asophomoreatColoradoStateUniversity,firsthadaproblemtakingtestswhenshebegancollege."Iwasalwaysw
Africanelephantshavebeenslaughteredatalarmingrateoverthepastdecade,largelybecausetheyaretheprimarysourceofth
—Ibegyoutoquitsmoking.Ican’treally______thatsmell.—I’mextremelysorrytohearthat.
Inthecollege-admissionswars,weparentsarethetruefights.Wearepushingourkidstogetgoodgrades,takeSATpreparatory
随机试题
A.薄荷B.紫苏C.荆芥D.防风能治肝气郁滞所致的胸闷胁痛的药是
精度等级为1.0级的检测仪表其最大相对百分误差为±1%。()
患者,女,39岁。因持续上腹痛伴恶心、呕吐3天入院。5年来有胆囊结石病,常有短暂上腹不适症状。B超显示胆囊多发小结石,总胆管宽9mm,其内未见结石,胰腺肿大增厚,周围有积液。查体:体温37.7℃,脉率106次/分,呼吸28次/分,血压132/86mmHg,
A.能量B.蛋白质C.脂肪D.维生素E.钙老年人骨质疏松症是因为缺乏()
A.气能生血B.津血同源C.气能行血D.气能行津E.津能载气
具有祛风湿,通经络,降血压功效的药物有
某热机,在温度为t1的热源和温度为t2的冷源间进行卡诺循环,其热效率为()。
在计算机中,总线的组成不包括()。
提出道德认识发展阶段的代表人物是()。
分权是指决策权在组织系统中较低管理层次上的分散,分权制的优点是:
最新回复
(
0
)