Posts by Anne M
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Dear god in heaven, it's recommending a Skoda
-
Apparently 80% of new doctors are foreign trained.
Please save me from having to read the SST - are these "new doctors" new to New Zealand, ie already with plenty of experience or are they "new" as in straight out of school?
-
Wondering how many coffee beans they can productively cram into each civet to make the exclusive coffee before said civet expires?
I don't see that civet death is an impediment to the further exploitation of the more-money-than-sense crowd. If you feed the first few coffee beans through attached to a long string then you could just continue to drag beans through the alimentary tract regardless of the civet's demise. In fact the natural fermentation process would probably be enhanced.
-
But couldn't some contract lawyers write a really tight bonding contract? With "you can't pay it back and weasel out, not ever" clauses?
I've no idea on the number of returning doctors either, beyond the traditional "I know a guy..." story. But the data will be somewhere.
-
But why should they credit us with smarts? The evidence tends to point the opposite way.
-
Well, OK. Phew in fact, I thought you may have been really serious.
I'm not sure that young doctors sloping off overseas is a 100% bad thing - for a start they get to learn on someone else. Like the 2% death rate in stomach bypass operations - nearly all occur in the first 20 ops. So they can become skilled overseas.
And lots of them do come back - how many PAers have worked or done post-grad overseas and then bought those skills back to NZ. more than a few of us.
But if you do want to retain them, how about bonding schemes, whereby fees are paid, scholarships given in return for a commitment to spend a certain amount of time doing less popular work (GPing?) or in less popular places?
-
You're not serious Malcolm? What about NZ medical research?
-
a politically mature debate would involve reframing the debate to focus on the quality of public spending rather than the quantity.
A politically mature debate could include both.
-
As a wage or salary earner it really makes no sense financially to remain in NZ vis-a-vis Australia unless you have to care for a sick relative or something (and don't give me no vague, BS notions of "lifestyle" otherwise). Only by delivering more income to employees will NZ be able to compete for workers with the skills to pay the national billz.
Ahh, depends on the place in Oz and the job. My sister is in the same line of work as me and living in Sydney where she is paying 1/2 her income in rent. I own a house (well half I suppose), mortgage-free.
Technically, she earns about NZ$10 K a year more than me. When it comes to actual spending money, I'm richer.I'm interested that you appear to think "lifestyle" doesn't count, only income. Really?
-
I love Hitchens and always will for his "simpering Bambi narcissist" remarks re: the Princess Di hagiographies but he seems to have got a bit ... strange. Anyone or anything he doesn't like is anti-semitic and thus deserves annihilation - Nixon, Iraq, Finsbury park fundamentalists. The reason they are awful is their antisemitism and no more need be said, except for the addition of some of that brilliant Hitchens invective.