Suchergebnisse

This article proposes a Marxian conceptual and empirical framework for understanding the disparate research on neoliberalism. In so doing, it examines the logic and processes of neoliberal transformation, focusing on both its theoretical and practical dimensions. As a consequence of the 1974—82 economic slump, with its crisis of profitability, advanced capitalist nations moved away from the socialization of economic activity and embraced the elements of coercive competition (market contestability, state rationalization, and factor mobility). During the early phase of neoliberalism, coercive competition recast the balance of class forces, remade the mode of production, and reorganized the accumulation process of social formations, helping to restore higher levels of profitability.

Evaluates changes in the welfare system in Sweden, the UK and the USA over a decade, basing arguments on the divergence of economic globalization and domestic forces. Presents brief economic snapshots of each country, stating quite categorically that the welfare state is an impediment to capitalist profit‐making, hence all three nations have retrenched welfare systems in the hope of remaining globally economically competitive. Lays the responsibility for retrenchment firmly at the door of conservative political parties. Takes into account public opinion, national institutional structures, multiculturalism and class issues. Explores domestic structures of accumulation (DSA) and refers to changes in the international economy, particularly the Bretton Woods system (Pax Americana), and notes how the economic health of nations mirrors that of the US. Investigates the roles of multinationals and direct foreign investment in the global economy, returning to how economic policy affects the welfare state. Points out the changes made to the welfare state through privatization, decentralization and modification of public sector financing. Concludes that the main result has been an increase in earnings inequality and poverty.

The question I want to discuss is "How can I say 'No' to a fund-raising appeal?" Since many people apparently find it easy to say "No," it is not clear what the problem is. Put briefly, the problem is this: I do not want to think of myself as uncaring, unfeeling, and insensitive to the needs of others. And yet, within the last year I have not responded to appeals for funds from a wide variety of causes: medical research, famine relief, freedom of speech, environmental protection. I have turned down requests for support of scholarly magazines, research institutes, and other good causes. My only moderate-sized contribution during that time has been to the capital campaign of an organization of which I am a member. I have enough to have made (very) small contributions to all of the organizations from which I received appeals, but not enough so that my contributions to any single cause would be of major significance. How can I justify not giving?The problem arises because these appeals (some of them, at least) apparently put moral claims upon me: they say that people are suffering and have needs, and you can help to meet them. Or they say that the intellectual and cultural life of our society will be enriched if you help.One traditional philosophic view holds that moral claims have a special status. They override political, economic, social, and other claims. The only thing, according to this view, that can free one from a moral claim is another moral claim.

AbstractManager plan brings efficient government, debt reduction, salary increases, while lowering tax rate for sixth year.

This paper clarifies some of the longstanding difficulties in negotiating Do Not Resuscitate Orders by reframing the source of the dilemmas as not residing with either the patient or the physician but with their relationship. The recommendations are low cost and low-tech ways of making major improvements to the care and quality of life of the most ill patients in hospital. With impending physician-assisted death legislation there is an urgency to find more efficient and beneficial ways for clinicians and patients to address resuscitation issues at the bedside. Paradigmatic shifts in the nature of the patient-physician relationship will need to be encouraged by the larger community. These encouraged shifts address the concepts of passive/inferior patient–active/superior physician, patient ownership of and access to all their health care information, and treating the patient as a major participant in the delivery of health care. These recommended changes will not in themselves make any patient, physician or other healthcare provider more humane and open in the patient's final days. The goal, instead, is to have changes to the context of the discussion provide an encouraging environment for more open communication and a balanced relationship among participants with the patient being the most important. ; Ce manuscrit clarifie certaines des difficultés rencontrées depuis longtemps dans la négociation des ordonnances de non-réanimation en recadrant la source des dilemmes comme ne résidant ni dans le patient ni dans le médecin, mais dans leur relation. Les recommandations sont des moyens peu coûteux et peu technologiques d'apporter des améliorations majeures aux soins et à la qualité de vie des patients les plus malades dans les hôpitaux. Avec la législation imminente sur la mort assistée par un médecin, il est urgent de trouver des moyens plus efficaces et plus bénéfiques pour les cliniciens et les patients d'aborder les questions de réanimation au chevet du patient. Des changements paradigmatiques dans la nature de ...