Army Evaluation Entry System: Fill & Download for Free

The word college was reserved for something foreign. In the USSR, specialized educational institutes were responsible for 95% of graduation. The rest were less specialized and more elite Universities. No bachelor program, only high school to master, in 5–6 years. Each institute/university got its own entry testing system, usually 4 tests: some in written, some in form of an interview, with 2–3 questions and 20–30 mins of preparation time, 1:1 in front of a tester (normally, a lecturer or an assistant). The biggest problems were:Highly subjective evaluationCorruption in the elite institutesTechnically, you could apply for one institute at the time only. If failed, you must wait a year instead of going to a less prestigious one. If you are a male, you had to pay the penix tax first: two years in the army, before trying again. Two shots per year were possible max, if you tried the most prestigious University in July. All the rest had the tests in August.The current Russian college entry system is very similar to the US and European systems. It is far from ideal but much better than it was under the USSR times.

University Entry Scheme(UES), is an entry scheme for pre-final and final year engineering students for technical roles in the Indian Army. The UES entry engineers join the the three technical corps of the Indian Army, i.e. the Corps of Engineers, Corps of Signals and the Corps of Electrical and Mechanical Engineers(Corps of EME).The role of Corps of Engineers:Being one of the oldest arms in the Indian Army, it performs numerous tasks both in and out of combat. Engineers in this corps are also called Combat Engineers.In war theater, they are primarily engaged in maintaining unit mobility by creating bridges, tracks and helipads.They also create obstacles in the path of the enemy units to hamper their movement and isolate their troops from their supply lines.The obstacles include laying of mines and demolition of bridges.Their role outside the combat zone includes overseeing construction activities by the Military Engineering Services( MES), who are responsible for supplying the forces with accessory services like water and electricity supply, military roads, furniture, drainage and refrigeration, and Border Roads Organization( BRO).Role of Corps of EME:The role of the Corps of EME( as given here @Page on Indianarmy, which I think perfectly describes what they do.)Refit / Reset / Remanufacture of Weapon systems & Equipment(at any of the 12 Army Base Workshops established over the country).Inspections.Recovery Operation in Peace and War.Equipment Trials (User & Sustainability Evaluation).Indigenisation and Manufacturing.Experimental Work including Operational Innovation.Technical Advice to Units on Systems.Design and Development of Weapon Systems.Defect Reports & Modifications.Role of Corps of Signals:The Corps of Signals handles military communications.More recently, it is also developing and operating electronic warfare technology and equipment, working in close relation with DRDO.It operates and maintains Army Wide Area Network(AWAN), which is basically the Army's own internet.It is developing Tactical Communication System(TCS) to replace the AREN communication system for more secure communication links.

Why would you expect it to? No, seriously. It’s been known for more than 50 years that healthcare cannot be a competitive market. Nobel laureate economist Kenneth Arrow wrote a paper explaining this: Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care. 1963.There are many requirements for the Perfect competition that would guarantee Allocative efficiency, ie, that prices would fall to the cost of delivering the services (plus normal profit), and many of those requirements are not met (quoting Wikipedia in bold, my comments in italics):A large number of buyers and sellers. You can’t ship healthcare, so the market is local. In many places that mean few sellers.Perfect information. For starters, good luck getting hospitals to tell you what a procedure will cost. How can you price shop if no one tells you the price? So much for competition. But even more importantly, vanishingly few patients have any idea how to evaluate whether the treatment a doctor proposes will be beneficial, much less whether it’s cost effective. No wonder Americans tend to get more expensive treatments than people in other countries, with no better outcomes.Homogeneous products. Not even close.Well defined property rights. This one gives the lie to the common narrative we often hear that if the government just stayed out of the market, we’d be living in nirvana. Without government intervention, there would be no property rights, because whoever had the most guns would take what they want. On top of that, the government needed to intervene again by creating a patent system, without which drug companies would have no reason to develop new drugs, because other companies would just duplicate them without paying the development costs.No barriers to entry or exit. The cost of building a hospital constitutes a barrier to entry. Regulation of doctors, hospitals, and drugs constitute a barrier to entry, although there are very good reasons for these regulations. Equally importantly, there’s a pretty big barrier to patients leaving the market: in some cases doing so would be fatal.Every participant is a price taker – No participant with market power to set prices. That’s certainly not true once you have the patent system. Drug companies can charge whatever they want without fear of competition. Even doctors are often price setters, for some of the reasons listed above. Sometimes a specialist may not have local competition, and even where there is local competition, because patients are not competent to evaluate healthcare quality, they often take price as a proxy for quality. In some cases, the doctor with the lowest prices are able to attract more patients by raising their price.There are seven more conditions that are probably not such big limitations, but these six conditions are not even close to being met.There are also 6 Reasons Healthcare Is So Expensive in the U.S. that are more specific to US healthcare. The biggest reason is administrative overhead. Insurance companies have about 10% overhead and around 3% profit. I’m sure they keep their overheads a low as they can, but hospitals file complex claims, and it’s expensive to check up on every claim to see if there are ground for denying it. On top of that, the number, variety, and complexity of insurance policies and claims procedures lead hospitals and doctors offices to employ armies of clerical staff to make claims (for example, Duke University Hospital, with 900 beds, employs 1300 billing clerks), in part because insurance companies have no incentive to make their policies and claim procedures efficient for doctors and hospitals.The second of the six reasons is drug costs, which I discussed above. The third is defensive medicine, where doctors order unnecessary tests just so they won’t be sued if something goes wrong. This happens because it’s so easy to sue in the US, and the payouts are so huge. Here I’m not talking about the cost of the payouts, I’m just talking about all the pointless tests that are done. These tests also have another cost: some tests carry some risk, so a few people may die because of unnecessary tests, and other tests may have false positives that lead to more expensive tests and even exploratory surgery, which also carries risk.The fourth reason is the point that Americans get more expensive treatments than people in other countries, as I discussed above. A related point is that many treatments that would be carried out by GPs in other countries are done by highly paid specialists in the US. The fifth reason is that US doctors are paid more than in most other countries. And the sixth reason is that some hospitals make a name for themselves, and are able to pretty much charge whatever they want. That is, Price elasticity of demand is very low. The world renowned brain surgeon who is going to cut out a difficult tumor is definitely not a price taker.One other issue that’s a little outside the question, but also important, is that containing costs isn’t everything. We’re talking about people’s lives, so the fact that some people don’t have enough money to enter the healthcare market strikes me as a very big problem. Look, if someone can’t afford to buy themselves a nice yacht, or the latest iPhone, or tickets to a Rihanna concert, that’s OK. People who have high paying jobs should have nicer things to give them an incentive to work hard. But I don’t think getting to continue living should be considered a perq for having a high paying job. Even if the “market” worked to get prices down (without giving us too many snake oil salesmen, quack doctors, and substandard hospitals), they will still be unaffordable to some people. We’re always going to need some mechanism to subsidize healthcare for the poorest. Right now, 40% of Americans (the 40% with the most expensive health needs) are on Medicare or Medicaid, and still Americans die because they can’t afford healthcare.