题目内容
A few years back, many hospitals in America were embarrassed by revelations that some of their neediest patients, the uninsured, were being charged the most. These patients were getting slammed with the full list price for health care while those with insurance got negotiated discounts. The outcry prompted congressional hearings and state inquiries. All not-for-profit hospitals in Illinois haveadopted voluntary guidelines, set by the Illinois Hospital Association, to dole out free or discounted care. But Illinois attorney general Lisa Madigan says that"s not nearly enough. Madigan announced recently that most Illinois hospitals spend less than 1 percent on charitable care. She proposed that hospitals be required by law to spend at least 8 percent of their operating costs on charity: free health care, community clinics. This is a terrible idea. For starters—amazing as this may sound—Madigan hasn"t calculated how much this law would cost hospitals. No overall cost, nor the cost to any single hospital in the state. The Illinois Hospital Association says her bill would require 133 hospitals to spend $739 million more a year on charity care. That, the IHA says, would push 45 of those hospitals into the red, and 28 hospitals that already operate at a loss would be pushed closer to bankruptcy. Madigan disputes those figures. How did Madigan settle on the magic 8 percent She cites her office"s investigation of hospitals and a task force she convened. But the task force didn"t issue a report and may never do so. She all but acknowledges that her claim that Illinois hospitals provide a miserly 1 percent in charitable care isn"t the whole story. That figure excludes much of what hospitals absorb, including the gap between what they spend on Medicaid patients and what they receive for that care. The IHA argues convincingly that mandating a high percentage of revenues to be spent on free care ignores the reality that many hospitals operate in the red. Draining more money would weaken hospitals—and encourage cost-cutting in nursing care, equipment or other essentials. Why are we talking about charitable giving by hospitals, as opposed to muffler shops, fast-food restaurants or beauty salons Because most hospitals are tax-exempt by law: They don"t pay any federal, state or local taxes. In return, they"re required to provide services to the needy. But the law doesn"t say exactly how much. So they do have a charitable obligation. And some hospitals—even some not-for-profit hospitals-have hefty revenues. It"s useful to see how much they"re giving back to their communities. But the hospitals also have an obligation to stay solvent. No one profits when a hospital closes its doors. Madigan"s proposed mandate carries too much risk. The IHA cited several figures to indicate that_____.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
The Gowanus Canal in Brooklyn is notoriously toxic. Since 1869, the mile-long waterway has been a dumping ground for garbage, industrial waste, guns and body parts—its waters once too dirty to search. Today you can still stand on a bridge over the canal and see underwear floating on the water. The odor, once almost unbearable, has softened into an occasional summerstink, thanks to a flushing tunnel installed 10 years ago.A growing number of artists and young people have moved into the industrial lofts and row houses nearby. Some of the most oblivious have been spotted on the canal in canoes, their paddles stirring 140 years worth of detritus (small pieces of rubbish) from leather factories, chemical plants and more. Now, these Gowanus pioneers want somebody to finally detoxify their hazardous neighborhood. They imagine it as Brooklyn"s little Venice, although a bit cleaner. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is considering naming the Gowanus an official Superfund site. That would bring in a slow but steady federal cleanup with money and the legal influence to force polluters to help pay. The present Mayor of the New York City also wants a cleaner Gowanus, but he wants to do it his way. At a community board meeting Tuesday night, about 200 people listened as the mayor"s experts argued against a Superfund listing. It was a hard crowd to move. Many wore a button that said it all: "Gowanus Canal: Superfund Me." The mayor and his team are particularly worried about how a Superfund site would affect the real estate market, especially a few possibilities for larger developments in the area. Instead of being "stigmatized" by the Superfund label, as they put it, they favor the "Superfund Alternative" plan. Although there are few details at this point, that effort would be run by the city and overseen by the EPA Every year, the city would rush to collect funds from the Corps of Engineers and other agencies to help clean up the area to the EPA"s satisfaction. The city could only plead with polluters to help pay. With so many pollutants and so many polluters, this looks like a job for Superfund. Brooklyn can handle the label. Residents already enjoy boasting about their survival or joking about living near the canal"s dark humors. Why else have a popular bar called the Gowanus Yacht Club They just want the cleanup done and done right. The EPA"s proposal of listing the Gowanus an official Superfund site will _____.
题干： “为了扭转邮政业务越来越不景气的局面，有人向政府建议提高邮票的价格。认为提价后会产生更多的收益，减少邮件流量，因此，能舒缓对现有系统的压力，并改善员工的工作面貌。所以，这一做法必定是有效的。” 分析上述论证在概念、论证方法、论据及结论等方面的有效性。600字左右。 (提示：论证有效性分析的一般要点是：概念特别是核心概念的界定和使用是否准确并前后一致，有无各种明显的逻辑错误。该论证的论据是否支持结论。论据成立的条件是否充分等。要注意分析的内容深度、逻辑结构和语言表达。)
A few years back, many hospitals in America were embarrassed by revelations that some of their neediest patients, the uninsured, were being charged the most. These patients were getting slammed with the full list price for health care while those with insurance got negotiated discounts. The outcry prompted congressional hearings and state inquiries. All not-for-profit hospitals in Illinois haveadopted voluntary guidelines, set by the Illinois Hospital Association, to dole out free or discounted care. But Illinois attorney general Lisa Madigan says that"s not nearly enough. Madigan announced recently that most Illinois hospitals spend less than 1 percent on charitable care. She proposed that hospitals be required by law to spend at least 8 percent of their operating costs on charity: free health care, community clinics. This is a terrible idea. For starters—amazing as this may sound—Madigan hasn"t calculated how much this law would cost hospitals. No overall cost, nor the cost to any single hospital in the state. The Illinois Hospital Association says her bill would require 133 hospitals to spend $739 million more a year on charity care. That, the IHA says, would push 45 of those hospitals into the red, and 28 hospitals that already operate at a loss would be pushed closer to bankruptcy. Madigan disputes those figures. How did Madigan settle on the magic 8 percent She cites her office"s investigation of hospitals and a task force she convened. But the task force didn"t issue a report and may never do so. She all but acknowledges that her claim that Illinois hospitals provide a miserly 1 percent in charitable care isn"t the whole story. That figure excludes much of what hospitals absorb, including the gap between what they spend on Medicaid patients and what they receive for that care. The IHA argues convincingly that mandating a high percentage of revenues to be spent on free care ignores the reality that many hospitals operate in the red. Draining more money would weaken hospitals—and encourage cost-cutting in nursing care, equipment or other essentials. Why are we talking about charitable giving by hospitals, as opposed to muffler shops, fast-food restaurants or beauty salons Because most hospitals are tax-exempt by law: They don"t pay any federal, state or local taxes. In return, they"re required to provide services to the needy. But the law doesn"t say exactly how much. So they do have a charitable obligation. And some hospitals—even some not-for-profit hospitals-have hefty revenues. It"s useful to see how much they"re giving back to their communities. But the hospitals also have an obligation to stay solvent. No one profits when a hospital closes its doors. Madigan"s proposed mandate carries too much risk. What can be inferred from the last paragraph
分析下面的论证在概念、论证方法、论据及结论等方面的有效性。600字左右。 我国古代的很多智慧结晶都表现在众多的成语中，“蚍蜉撼大树”、“以卵击石”都表现实力相差悬殊的搏斗只能以弱小的一方失败而告终。这个规律在今天的经济生活中同样适用。大企业无论在资金、人力、技术和信息等方面都有着小企业无法比拟的优势。所以，小企业若想生存，只能依托大企业，作为大企业的附庸而存在。那些自不量力，试图通过竞争与大企业分庭抗礼的做法，最终只能走上一条自我毁灭的道路。
微信支付 
支付宝支付