Ah, the joys of being a perpetual student. I have forty-eight hours to finish going over three chapters of health economics. That means for the next two days I will probably be scarce with the news updates, the tirades, the snarky comments, the pro-Korea apologism, the anti-American sentiment, and the information of questionable integrity. [left: University of Rochester professor Charles E. Phelps is making my life a living hell.]
(This is actually my second go-around with this subject: the first time was in an upper-division economics course, and this time it's part of a public health curriculum.)
UPDATE: Today's dinner is also laulau.
UPDATE (Monday evening): I aced my exam. Fifteen correct out of fifteen (it was an on-line multiple choice exam, but it was no cake walk; the mean was twelve). It pays to read the materials, kiddies.
What the hell are you studying that for? twice? What do you want to be when you grow up, a nurse?
ReplyDeleteAn admirable profession, but seroiusly, what relevance is it to you degree?
Actually, nurse practitioners make a lot of money, but that's not what I'm trying to do.
ReplyDeleteMy studies focus on public health, and my focus is in Korea.
Health economics is an interesting but neglected part of the whole picture, but it's becoming more relevant as different countries work on different ways to treat their population.
Until last semester, this was only offered as an upper-division undergrad course, in the economics department. It was hard, and I had to rely on economics stuff I had learned and forgotten back in the 1990s.
Anyway, then the very next semester — this semester — they offered it as a graduate course in my department. It's a little watered down for non-econ students and made more relevant to public health and public policy, so it's worth taking again.