Uploaded by faisal hasan

Commercialization of medical services

Commercialization of medical services
According to me, today's commercialization of health care is bad because of the worst of politics.
Because of people have not aware of health care.
I think 75% of the Indian family is middle-class family so they can not afford high charge of hospitals.
And approximately 40-45% of people can not effort hospital charges at all because they live below the
poverty line, and that 75% and above of people generally need more health care than rich people just
because of their standard of life. They consume less quality products due to their low income which
directly affects their health and the number of those people is very high in India. So, the
Commercialization of health care is not good, that's all. And I think politics and rich people can handle
the health care of India if they donate money and some help to poor people.
Winning is what matters, whatever be the cost
You might be thinking that I am befooling you but if you think deeper, my friend, you will realize this is
the truth. Indeed, winning is not everything. Whether you win or lose, what mattered the most that you
tried. If you have tried and given your best, you have won.
There is no competition with others when you are competing with yourself. But one day, you would not
realize that while competing with yourself, you have surpassed the achievements of other players of the
same field.
If you think that winning is everything, there would be a high probability that you will lose the game. It is
not a cake walk, my friend. It requires a lot of hard work, persistence, and dedication. If you have
already assumed that winning is everything, you are not going to win.
There would be a point in your life where you would have to face the defeat. On that point of your life,
you would lose everything if winning has been everything to you. You would lose the motivation to
stand up and fight again as your energy and motivation would be drained away with the defeat in a
Income disparity due to modern technology
Introduction of artificial intelligence has been another stepping stone in technology as well as in income
inequality. At last year’s World Economic Forum in Davos it was stated that AI is ushering in the 4th
industrial revolution which will change the society as we know it. According to a recent report from
McKinsey, half of the world’s jobs could be automated by 2055.
Technology as we know has become a part of our life. We cannot just live on without it. But it is like a
coin with same sides but both having a different result.
One side is that, it does create income disparities among the working class. It only creates opportunities
for those who are familiar with it. But this itself can sometimes be a danger, that is not all the firms stay
at the top of business list for long. Some or the other day they will come down, which will force the
employer to minimize the wages or remove some of the workers.
Second, if there wasn't any technology then more number of people would have been at job which is a
good point. But the production would not be up to the mark, which might cause workers getting less
So its clear that technology do creates income disparity which might make us think that we don't need
any technology, but absence of it is also gives the same result.
Its like a Quadratic equation with two roots but the same answer.
Thank you.
What is net neutrality?
Net neutrality is the concept of an open, equal internet for everyone, regardless of device, application or
platform used and content consumed. Proponents of the idea believe all corporations, including internet
service providers (ISPs), should treat internet data and users equally. They should not restrict access,
slow down access speeds or block content for some users to serve their own interests.
ISPs should also not make special arrangements with any companies to give them improved network
speeds or access.
Road to success : hard work or smart work
Thank, you for allowing me to share my opinion.
Before that, I would like to tell you what hard work and smart work are.
Hard work means working consistently on a task without worrying about the results, it needs diligence
and commitment. Hard work indicates honesty and readiness to take up an entire responsibility.
On the other hand, smart work includes working on a particular task using a smart strategy based on
someone's knowledge and experience to make it less time-consuming. But in my opinion, hard work and
smart work play a crucial role. One needs to work hard to achieve a goal or to become perfect on that,
but only after the hard work he or she be able to apply smart strategies to make it less time-consuming.
For example, if somebody is preparing for an aptitude test, one needs to work hard to clear all his or her
concepts or to become an expert. But during the examination, he or she needs to apply smart tricks so
that he or she can save time during the examination.
As we know, Clapping involves both hands, we can not clap using only one hand.
In conclusion, I would say, hard work and smart work both are equally important to become successful.
After working hard, one can become a smart person.
Flexi-timings vs fixed timings at work
According to me, time is Gold, it cannot return. So we should not waste our time. Flexitime means any
work I can do any time but fixed time means there is a specified time for the work. According to me,
fixed time is better for work. If there is no specific time then people he or she will think will do it but
when he thinks he will do maybe think right now I have no mood I will do it later. In this way people get
lazy. He will not be able to complete the work but discipline is very much important in our life.
Indiscipline people is not able to do anything in their life. So we go to the office in time and start Office
in time and a particular time complete our work exceptional case is different So fixed time is better at
Compulsory attendance in professional courses.
Hi everyone!
In my opinion, college attendance should not be compulsory as we all know that we are living in the
digital world and students can get top-level education from youtube and other websites which actually
most colleges failed to provide.
In engineering, all are learning concepts from youtube. So if you will impose attendance issues in college
that will result in a lack of concept clearance in students
Examination- has it killed education
Hello everyone.
1) According to my opinion, on this topic. Yes, the examination is killing real education. In this era, every
parent is in a rat race everyone just wants good grades only in academics nothing less than this. So this
type of attitude is murdering the real talent of students.
2) some students are very perfect in sports, games and many other activities but because of pressure,
they have to enrol themselves in education meanwhile they are not so much interested in the study.
3) Examination is the only method to judge that how intelligent you are not how much talented you are
but in India marks are everything for parents they judge their kids according to marks.
4) Wherever a student goes only grades are important for every company.
5) Government should be changed the examination pattern and have to give marks according to the
talent of the student.
6) Examination also creating jealousy, anxiety in between the students they feel alone and depressed.
7) School should give marks according to the reasoning of the students.
8) Indian education has this massive drawback that examination is the only method to recognize the
ability of the student and that's mindset is 100% wrong. We keep in mind that talent and being
intelligent these 2 things are vastly different from each other.
So in a nutshell examination really killing the real meaning of education there is a lot of scope in
changing some important aspects in the examination pattern.
Related documents