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
28
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
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()。
阅读下面材料,回答问题。材料一艾赛亚.柏林曾说:“牛顿思想的冲击是巨大的;无论对它们的理解正确与否。启蒙运动的整个纲领,尤其是法国,是有意识地以牛顿的原理和方法为基础的,同时,它从他那惊人的成果中获得了信心并由此产生了深远的影响。”
Whenastudentsaidinclass,"Igoedthereyesterday,"theteacherresponded,"Sayitagain,please."Theresponseisanexampl
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
Theactivityof______maymaximizethepossibilityofelicitingideas,wordsorconceptsfromstudentswhenitisfocusedonagi
AnneWhitney,asophomoreatColoradoStateUniversity,firsthadaproblemtakingtestswhenshebegancollege."Iwasalwaysw
AnneWhitney,asophomoreatColoradoStateUniversity,firsthadaproblemtakingtestswhenshebegancollege."Iwasalwaysw
Therearemanydifferentwaysofpresentinggrammarintheclassroom.Amongthem,threearemostfrequentlyusedanddiscussed.
Backintheolddays,whenIwasachild,wesataroundthefamilyroundtableatdinnertimeandexchangedourdailyexperience
Itisfutiletodiscussthematterfurther,because______goingtoagreeuponanythingtoday.
随机试题
Attheageof21,SteveJobsandafriend,StephenWozniak,builtapersonalcomputercalledtheApple.TheApplechangedpeople
典型肺炎球菌肺炎的临床特征是
关于建设工程纠纷的处理,以下说法正确的一项是( )。
以下属于政府对市场价格的干预措施的是( )。
下列关于“企业价值最大化”的财务管理目标表述中,不正确的是()。
试述食谱编制的基本原则和要求。
“扬州八怪”中擅长画竹且作风狂放的画家是()。
Theideathatmusicmakesyousmarterhasreceivedconsiderableattentionfromscholarsandthemedia.Currentinterestin【C1】__
在VisualFoxPro的命令窗口中键入CREATE命令以后,屏幕会出现一个创建对话框,要想完成同样的工作,还可以单击“文件”菜单中的“新建”按钮,然后______。
PassageThreeWhatisthewordusedtorefertotheresidueofcalciumcarbonate,silica,ironoxideandaluminathatpartially
最新回复
(
0
)