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
67
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 NOT used in the author’s presentation of his ideas?
选项
A、Thesis statement.
B、Rhetorical questions.
C、Specific examples.
D、Direct quotation.
答案
A
解析
A项并不是作者阐述自己观点的方式。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/WrCv777K
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
如何做好初、高中历史教学的衔接问题?
阅读下面材料,回答问题。在学习“俄国农奴制改革”时,教师先利用投影显示新闻片段:据俄罗斯新闻网2005年6月8日报道,亚历山大二世的改革,使俄罗斯最终告别了落后的农奴制。为了纪念这位沙皇在世界近代史上作出的巨大贡献,俄罗斯政府于2005年6月7日,在莫
阅读下面材料,回答问题。材料一李鸿章说:“各口岸生意,已被洋人占尽,华商领管船另树一帜,洋人势力挟重资以倾夺,则需华商自立公司,收回洋人夺去之利。”这表明李鸿章主张兴办民用企业的最主要意图是与外国资本主义争夺市场。材料二根据上述材料,编制一道
Whichofthefollowingnominatingpatternscanateacheradopttoensurethatallstudentsareactivelyinvolvedinclassroomac
Hepledgedsupportfor"______care",whereyoungsterswerelookedafterbycloserelativeslikeauntsoruncles,butnotparent
AnneWhitney,asophomoreatColoradoStateUniversity,firsthadaproblemtakingtestswhenshebegancollege."Iwasalwaysw
JatenderpalSinghBhullar,25,isaguardsmaninBritain.OnDec11,2012,hebecamethefirstIndiansoldiertoparadeoutside
Whenschoolwasout,Ihurriedtofindmysisterandgetoutoftheschoolyardbeforeseeinganybodyinmyclass.ButBarbaraa
Inthecollege-admissionswars,weparentsarethetruefights.Wearepushingourkidstogetgoodgrades,takeSATpreparatory
Whenateacherintendstopresentorexplainanewlanguagepoint,whichofthefollowinggroupingmethodsismostlyrecommended
随机试题
世贸组织承袭关贸总协定的决策方式是()
A.甲状腺疼痛B.宜手术治疗C.多见于老年人D.甲状腺触诊质硬亚急性甲状腺炎伴甲亢可见
以下骨折CT检查相对于平片可以提供更多诊断信息的是
下面关于新医学模式的理解,不正确的是
男,43岁,车祸致头部受伤6小时来诊。体格检查:意识模糊,躁动不安,喷射性呕吐,血压升高,脉搏缓慢而有力,呼吸深陧,瞳孔无缩小或散大,视神经盘水肿。该病人目前面临的最大危险是
人民法院应在立案之日起5日内将()发送被告,被告在收到之日起15日内提出答辩状。
《贝希斯敦铭文》使用何种语言?()
世界上第1台电子数字计算机ENIAC是在1946年研制成功的,其诞生的国家是
Attitudesaboutexpressingangervaryfromculturetoculture.Insomecultures,almostanysignofangerisinappropriate.Ino
Properarrangementofclassroomspaceisimportanttoencouraginginteraction.Today’scorporationshirehumanengineeringspec
最新回复
(
0
)