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
82
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
英国首相布莱尔说:“长期以来不干涉主义一直被视为国际秩序中一项重要的原则,但不干涉主义原则,必须在一些重要方面加以限定:国家主权和防止种族灭绝的重要。”基于此理论,美英于1999年轰炸南联盟,2003年发动伊拉克战争体现了这一理论的核心是()。
设计任务:请阅读下面学生信息和语言素材,设计一节课的教学方案。教案没有固定格式,但须包含下列要点:teachingobjectivesteachingcontentskeyanddifficultpoints
Whenateacherintendstointroduceanewgrammaritem,whichofthefollowingstrategiescanbeusedtogetstudentstonotice
Teachersbelievinginthe______modelinageneralsenseusuallyfollowthesequenceofteachingnewwords,sentencesandthent
UnlessyouspendmuchtimesittinginacollegeclassroomorbrowsingthroughcertainareasoftheInternet,it’spossiblethat
InBrazil,thedebateovergeneticallymodifiedorganisms,orGMOs,affectsmostlysoybeanproduction.Brazilistheworld’sse
Therearemanydifferentwaysofpresentinggrammarintheclassroom.Amongthem,threearemostfrequentlyusedanddiscussed.
Theclassroomteachingenvironmentconsistsofclassroomenvironmentand______.
Whatpurposedoespost-listeningactivitiesNOTserve?
Whenschoolwasout,Ihurriedtofindmysisterandgetoutoftheschoolyardbeforeseeinganybodyinmyclass.ButBarbaraa
随机试题
间接融资是指拥有暂时闲置货币资金的单位通过存款的形式,或者购买银行、信托、保险等金融机构发行的有价证券,将其暂时闲置的资金先行提供给这些金融中介机构,然后再由这些金融机构以贷款、贴现等形式,或通过购买需要资金的单位发行的有价证券,把资金提供给这些单位使用,
对各项政策方案效果的预测性分析和比较,这是政策方案的()
66.有关免疫抑制剂与药物、食物同服的影响,说法正确的有
A、Onmanyroutes,airlineshavelostupto90%oftheirpassengerstohighspeedtrains.B、ThespeedtrainservicebetweenParis
下列选项中,口服剂型药物的生物利用度顺序正确的是()。
小周是一个饲料厂的销售员,与各方面有广泛的接触,他认为法律没有人重要,有人、有朋友就有法律。他的这种认识属于下列哪一选项?()
北京丽美服装有限公司(110451××××)开展来料加工业务,加工成品返销韩国。北京丽美服装有限公司委托北京顺宇国际货运有限公司(110482××××)办理出口报关手续。货物从北京运输到天津,经船舶“HONGYUNV701E”号运输到韩国。其加工登
下列各项中,不能增加企业核心竞争力的是()。
关于公安执法监督说法正确的是()。
下面程序运行时,若输入395,则输出结果是()。PrivateSubCmdl_Click()Dima%a=InputBox(“请输入一个3位整数”)PrintaMod10,
最新回复
(
0
)