天涯部落

小圈子,大声音!呼朋引伴网聚部落!

创建新部落?

厦门韩国整容多少钱最新中文

楼主:康泰频道 时间:2020年01月29日 16:57:30 点击:0 回复:0
脱水模式给他打赏只看楼主阅读设置
A South Carolina grand jury has indicted a white former police officer who shot and killed an unarmed black man fleeing after a traffic stop.美国南卡罗来纳州的一个大陪审团对开打死黑人的一名白人警察提出起诉。被打死的黑人开车被警察拦下检查时企图逃离现场, 他当时并没有携带武器。Michael Slager was fired and accused of murder in the April 4 killing of 50-year-old Walter Scott. Slager pulled Scott over for driving with a broken brake light.白人警察迈克尔·斯拉格尔今年4月开打死50岁的沃尔特·斯科特之后被解雇并被控谋杀。斯拉格尔因为斯科特驾驶的车辆刹车灯故障而命令他停车。A , taken by a bystander with a cellphone camera, showed Scott running away as Slager pulls his gun and fires eight shots. Slager initially said he opened fire after Scott had taken his electronic stun gun during a scuffle.一个旁观者用手机拍摄的视屏显示,斯科特企图逃离现场,警察斯拉格尔向他连开8。斯拉格尔最初说,他和斯科特发生扭打,斯科特抢走了他的电棍。Slager faces between 30 years and life in prison without the possibility of parole if convicted.如果罪名成立,斯拉格尔有可能被判处30年徒刑,甚至是无期徒刑,不得假释。The South Carolina incident is one of the latest in a series of fatal encounters in the ed States between unarmed black males and white police.美国最近发生多起未携带武装黑人死于白人警察之手的事件,南卡的击案是其中之一。The incidents led to large protests across the nation over aggressive police tactics in minority communities.这些事件引发了全美各地的大规模抗议示威。人们抗议警察在少数族裔社区过度使用警力的做法。The U.S. Justice Department has launched investigations into possible civil rights violations by police in a number of the cases.美国司法部已对一些案件展开调查,看警察是否侵犯了公民权利。 /201506/379797Life#39;s pretty good these days for French economist Thomas Piketty, who spent Wednesday evening having his book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, lavishly praised by two of the world#39;s most famous economists -- Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz -- who just happen to own three Nobel Prizes between them.法国经济学家托马斯·皮凯蒂这些天来过得相当舒。上周三晚上,经济学家保罗·克鲁格曼和约瑟夫·斯蒂格利茨都高度评价了皮凯蒂撰写的《21世纪的资本》(Capital in the Twenty-First Century)——两人都属于全球经济学界最知名的群体,一共获得过三次诺贝尔经济学奖。Piketty would probably prefer that the book that is garnering him such attention were the bearer of better news. But economists don#39;t tend to gain renown by assuring the public that everything is A-Okay. That is certainly not the message of Capital, a 600-plus page work that convincingly warns ers that rising global wealth and income inequality over the past generation is actually the norm for capitalist economies, and that we should expect that trend to continue in the years to come.也许,皮凯蒂更愿意看到这本让他这么受关注的书给人们带来好一点儿的消息。但经济学家成名的原因往往不是告诉公众一切安好。这本600多页的书当然也不会传递出这样的信息——它以令人信的方式告诫读者,过去几十年中,全球财富和收入差距扩大的局面实际上就是资本主义经济的常态,而且今后这种趋势还会继续下去。The title of the book is an allusion to Karl Marx#39;s famous critique of capitalism, and Piketty#39;s analysis shows that Marx was right to believe that wealth concentration would inexorably increase in capitalist societies. Piketty draws upon work he and colleagues like Anthony Atkinson of Oxford and Emmanuel Saez of Berkeley have done in recent years to show that income and wealth inequality are increasing in the rich world, and to argue that the more egalitarian economic distribution seen after World War II was an anomaly that we can#39;t expect to return to unless we implement government policies to bring it about.这本书的题目效仿了卡尔o马克思著名的资本主义批判理论。马克思认为,资本主义社会的财富集中无可避免,皮凯蒂的分析明了这条思路的正确性。皮凯蒂采用了最近几年自己和同行们的研究成果,这些同行包括牛津(Oxford)大学教授安东尼o阿特金森和加州大学伯克利(Berkeley)分校教授艾曼努尔o赛斯。皮凯蒂用这些研究成果表明,富裕国家的收入和贫富差距正在拉大。他还指出,二战后经济领域的分配情况较为平均是一种反常现象,除非政府出台相关政策,否则这种局面就不会再次出现。A debate on Wednesday evening at CUNY#39;s The Graduate Center featuring Piketty, Krugman, Stiglitz, and University of Wisconsin economist Steven Durlauf helped distill some of the ideas presented in Capital, and to critique its weaker points.上周三晚上,纽约市立大学(CUNY)毕业生中心举行了一场辩论会,出席者包括皮凯蒂、克鲁格曼、斯蒂格利茨以及威斯康星大学(University of Wisconsin)经济学家史蒂文o杜尔拉夫。他们对《21世纪的资本》(Capital)中的部分观点进行了提炼,同时指出了它的不足之处。Piketty#39;s colleagues were quick to praise the book. Krugman lauded it as a ;unified field theory; of economics which joins together the study of economic growth, the distribution of income between capital and labor, and income inequality. Stiglitz was equally taken by the work, arguing that Americans would not be bothered by increased inequality if it were based on merit within a society that enables class mobility. But the U.S. is near the bottom when it comes to social mobility.皮凯蒂的同事们都积极评价这本书。克鲁格曼把它誉为经济学领域的“统一场理论”,并称其中的研究融合了经济增长、资本和劳动力之间的收入分配以及收入差距。斯蒂格利茨对这本书也持同样的观点。他说,美国实现了人们在各个阶层之间的流动,如果这本书以美国社会的这个优点为基础,就无法让美国人注意到贫富差距正在扩大。但美国的社会流动性接近全球最低水平。Durlauf played the role of the critic in the debate, poking holes in some of the more technical aspects of Piketty#39;s argument, like his dismissal of the ;marginal product theory; of wages (which basically asserts that a worker is paid based on his marginal contribution to a commercial enterprise) without suggesting some theory to replace it. He also suggested that Piketty should spend more time thinking about whether technology could be the reason, rather than capitalism itself, for growing disparities in wealth and income.杜尔拉夫充当了辩论会上的批评者,他从更为技术性的层面指出了皮凯蒂论述中的漏洞,比如皮凯蒂不同意工资的“边际产品理论”(这项理论的基本内容是,工人得到的报酬取决于他们对商业企业的边际贡献),但他没有提出其他理论来予以替代。杜尔拉夫还说,皮凯蒂应该花更多的时间来探讨造成贫富和收入差距拉大的原因是否应该是技术,而不是资本主义本身。This critique, like those that have been offered by conservative economists Greg Mankiw and Kevin Hassett, doesn#39;t do anything to challenge the evidence that pre-tax income and wealth inequality is growing very quickly in the rich world. Mankiw, for instance, has argued that things like government subsidies, social security, and welfare have increased people#39;s after-tax income, so Piketty#39;s evidence of rising inequality shouldn#39;t be taken seriously. But such programs just show that the government is aly responding to increased inequality by redistributing wealth.和保守派经济学家格雷格·曼昆以及凯文·哈西特提出的观点一样,杜尔拉夫的意见丝毫不能改变这样一个事实,那就是,富裕国家的税前收入和贫富差距正在迅速扩大。举例来说,曼昆认为政府补贴、社会保障和福利等因素提高了人们的税后收入,因此,皮凯蒂列举的贫富差距拉大据不应该受到重视。但这些因素恰恰表明,政府已经开始通过重新分配财富来解决贫富差距扩大的问题。The most interesting argument against Piketty#39;s idea that a global wealth tax is needed to combat inequality comes from Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute. He points out that the rise in inequality in the wealthy world over the past generation has been matched by similarly striking reductions in global inequality, and if we are studying this issue on a global scale, this reduction in inequality makes the need for a global wealth tax seem unnecessary. Hassett also believes it#39;s important for those of us in the developed world to not take a self-centered view of global capitalism, and that we should be hesitant to mess with a system that has brought so many people out of poverty over the past 30 years.皮凯蒂认为,需要通过在全球范围内征收财富税来缩小贫富差距。对此,来自美国企业研究所(American Enterprise Institute)的凯文o哈西特提出了最有意思的反驳意见。哈西特指出,过去二、三十年来,全球贫富差距缩小的幅度和富裕国家贫富差距拉大的幅度相仿,如果在全球范围内研究这个问题,那么在贫富差距缩小的情况下似乎没有必要征收财富税。哈西特还认为,要点在于,发达国家的人们不要以自身为中心来观察整个资本主义世界,他们不应该忽视这样一个事实,那就是30年来资本主义体制让如此之多的人摆脱了贫困。But none of Piketty#39;s critics have been able to disprove the rise in pre-tax wealth and income inequality on a national level. Capital, in other words, has shifted the debate from the question of whether inequality is a problem to what exactly we should do about it.但对皮凯蒂的所有批评都没能明各个国家的税前收入和贫富差距没有扩大。换句话说,这本书已经让争论的焦点从贫富差距是否带来了问题发生了转变,变成了我们究竟应该怎么应对贫富差距。 /201405/301278Rosneft is about to start drilling its first oil well in Norway with the help of Norwegian state-owned Statoil despite Russia’s oil industry being subject to extensive European sanctions.俄罗斯石油公司(Rosneft,简称俄油)即将在挪威国有的挪威国家石油公司(Statoil)的帮助下,在挪威境内开钻第一口油井,尽管俄罗斯石油业正受到欧洲的广泛制裁。The well in the Barents Sea, inside the Arctic Circle, is in one of the four fields in which Rosneft won a 20 per cent stake in the Norwegian licensing round last year.这口位于北极圈内白令海上的油井,是俄油去年在挪威的许可招标中竞得20%股权的四口油井之一。It marks the latest foreign co-operation with Rosneft, showing the limits of the sanctions, which apply only to future contracts and partnerships.这是俄油与外国公司合作的最新案例,表明西方对俄制裁的局限——制裁只适用于未来的合约和合作关系。ExxonMobil this summer will start drilling in Russia’s Arctic as part of a joint venture with Rosneft. The drilling rig for that well in the Kara Sea will be provided by SeaDrill, the world’s biggest offshore drilling company, which is controlled by Norway’s richest man.埃克森美孚(ExxonMobil)已与俄油成立了合资企业,今夏将在俄罗斯的北极地区进行钻井作业。在喀拉海油井作业的钻机,将由挪威首富旗下的全球最大海上钻井公司SeaDrill提供。Statoil and Italy’s Eni have also signed partnerships with Rosneft to help search for the vast energy resources thought to exist in Russia’s remote Arctic areas.挪威国家石油公司和意大利的埃尼(Eni)也与俄油建立了合作关系,帮其勘探据认为蕴藏在俄罗斯遥远的北极地区的巨量能源资源。But the partnerships have been controversial not just because of the western sanctions against Russia over Ukraine, which affect both Rosneft and its chief executive Igor Sechin. Environmental groups such as World Wildlife Fund and Greenpeace believe the risk of an oil spill in the Arctic is too great to justify drilling there.但是,这些合作一直存在着争议,原因不仅在于西方出于俄乌局势考虑对俄实施了制裁,制裁既影响俄油,也影响其首席执行官伊戈尔#8226;谢钦(Igor Sechin)。世界自然基金会(World Wildlife Fund)和绿色和平组织(Greenpeace)等环保团体也认为,北极地区发生石油泄漏的风险太大,不应在那里进行钻井作业。 /201408/322131Income inequality is a hot topic in Washington. President Barack Obama is expected to highlight inequality and economic mobility in his State of the Union address Tuesday.在华盛顿,收入失衡是个热点话题。总统奥巴马(Barack Obama)预计将在周二的国情咨文(State of the Union)演讲中强调失衡现象以及经济流动性。One factor he likely won#39;t discuss: Income inequality has gotten worse in past decades in part because college-educated, high-earning men and women are more likely to marry each other, rather than get hitched to partners with divergent education or wage levels.他可能不会提及的一大要点是,过去数十年来收入越发失衡的原因之一在于,受过高等教育、薪资不菲的男女结为夫妇的可能性更高,教育背景、薪资水平差距很大的两人则不太可能走到一起。A research paper -- by University of Pennsylvania economist Jeremy Greenwood; Nezih Guner, a research professor at Markets, Organizations and Votes in Economics (MOVE), a research institute based in Barcelona; University of Konstanz economist Georgi Kocharkov; and University of Mannheim economist Cezar Santos -- tracks trends from 1960 to 2005.宾夕法尼亚州立大学(University of Pennsylvania)经济学家Jeremy Greenwood、巴塞罗那研究机构Markets, Organizations and Votes in Economics (MOVE)研究教授Nezih Guner、德国康斯坦茨大学(University of Konstanz)经济学家Georgi Kocharkov以及曼海姆大学(University of Mannheim)经济学家Cezar Santos联合进行了一项研究,追踪1960年至2005年间人们的择偶趋势。The paper, #39;Marry Your Like: Assortative Mating and Income Inequality, #39; finds that the rise of women in the workforce and a growing tendency to find a partner from a similar educational and professional background is exacerbating income trends.这篇名为;Marry Your Like: Assortative Mating and Income Inequality;(《人以群分:选择性择偶与收入失衡》)的研究报告指出,随着越来越多的女性加入劳动力大军,人们更倾向于选择一个教育、专业背景与己接近的配偶,这加剧了收入差距的悬殊。The upshot: The rich are getting richer. In 1960, a household in the top 10% earned about three-and-a-half times the mean U.S. income. In 2005, that had jumped to more than four times the mean.关键在于,有钱的人越来越有钱。1960年,最富有的10%家庭的收入大约是平均值的3.5倍;2005年,这一比例扩大至4倍多。For the bottom 10%, the situation has deteriorated. In 1960, such a household earned 16% of mean income. By 2005, that was down to 8%.而对于最贫困的那10%而言,情况变得更加糟糕。1960年,这类家庭的收入等于平均值的0.16倍;到了2005年,其收入与平均值之比降到了8%。#39;Incomes are more polarized in 2005, #39; the paper says. #39;The change in wages across individuals is the primary driver of this increase in income inequality.#39;研究报告指出,2005年收入更趋两极化,个人工资的变动是收入差距扩大的主要推手。The authors don#39;t offer a solution. They do note that if marriages followed the same patterns as in 1960 there would be a significant reduction in income inequality.研究者没有给出一种解决方案。但他们指出,如果人们的择偶模式回到1960年,那么收入差距将被极大缩窄。#39;So, if people matched in 2005 according to the standardized mating pattern observed in 1960, which showed less positive assortative matching, then income inequality would drop because income is more diversified across husband and wife, #39; the paper says.报告称,假若2005年的人们也像1960年那样根据某一标准化的择偶模式来结合、而不是今天这种“门当户对”的精挑细选型婚配,那么收入失衡现象将减轻,因为夫妻俩的收入将更加多元。 /201402/275686

When I close my eyes and think back to apartheid, it’s 1984 and I’m sitting on my grandparents’ veranda in Johannesburg. It’s a blazing December day, and I’ve just had a swim in their pool. Nesta, the black maid who lives behind the kitchen, is cutting the chocolate cake. In the garden below, her grandchildren are playing in our old underpants from Europe. We all know that apartheid will last forever.当我合上双眼回忆种族隔离年代时,脑海里就会闪现1984年我坐在约翰内斯堡祖父母家门廊上的画面。那是11月的一天,屋外艳阳高照,我刚在他们家的游泳池里游了个泳。黑人女仆奈丝塔在切巧克力蛋糕,她就住在厨房后面。门廊下的花园里,她的孙辈们在玩耍着,身上穿着我们从欧洲带回来的旧内裤。我们都以为种族隔离会永远维持下去。Twenty years ago this Sunday, South Africa’s first multiracial elections officially buried apartheid. But I still see apartheid everywhere I go. In part, this is a personal deformation. The apartheid I witnessed on visits to my grandparents was the most vivid sight of my childhood, more interesting than anything in the small Dutch town where I grew up, and so it remains my frame for understanding the world.20年前的4月27日,南非首次不分种族的选举正式埋葬了种族隔离制度。但我不管去哪儿,仍到处可见种族隔离的影子。这多少带有个人性质的畸形。在祖父母家目睹的种族隔离是我最生动鲜明的童年画面,比我长大时的常居地——荷兰小镇里的一切要有趣得多,因此它成了我理解世界的框架。True, the analogy with South African apartheid is never perfect. Today’s apartheid isn’t as naked. No country now has laws dividing people by “race”. No country proclaims a policy of “Bantu education”, which deliberately teaches blacks only just enough to do lowly jobs for whites. And yet things often seem to end up that way.没错,与南非种族隔离制度的任何类比都是不完美的。今天的种族隔离表现得没有那么裸。如今再没有国家立法以“种族”划分人民,也没有国家宣布“班图人教育”(Bantu education)政策——一项将黑人刻意教育得仅能为白人完成低端工作的教育政策。可事情往往最终会向那个方向发展。I especially see apartheid in the US. True, the country has made racist speech taboo. Use a racial epithet in public and your career combusts. That’s lovely.我在美国见到的种族隔离尤胜于别处。没错,这个国家禁止发表种族主义言论。如果谁当众用到带种族主义色的词语,他的职业生涯就算完了。这挺好。However, American school taxes are usually raised locally, and many neighbourhoods are segregated, and so most poor black children attend underfunded schools where they learn just enough to do lowly jobs for whites. The US later tries to airlift a few victims out of the ghetto through “affirmative action”, but by then the damage is done. Like apartheid South Africa, the US ensures through schooling that most black people won’t succeed. It just doesn’t call this “Bantu education”.然而,美国的学校通常靠地方税收维持,而许多居民区是隔离的,因此家境贫寒的黑人孩子大多只能就读于资金匮乏的学校,他们在那儿所受的教育仅够为白人完成低端工作。虽然后来美国试图通过“平权法案”从贫民区里救出少数牺牲品,但到了那时伤害已经铸就。就像种族隔离制度下的南非,美国的教育制度意味着大多数黑人无法走上成功道路。美国只是不把这称作“班图人教育”。My instinctive measure of a society is how closely it resembles South African apartheid. On that score the Netherlands – despite ample racist speech – arguably beats the US, because the Dutch give so-called “black schools” more funding than white suburban schools. Similarly, ethnically mixed-up London has less apartheid than segregated Paris.我衡量一个社会时,本能上会看其与南非种族隔离制度的相近程度。以这个评分标准来看,充斥着大量种族歧视言论的荷兰可以说胜过美国,因为荷兰给所谓的“黑人学校”的拨款要高于白人郊区学校。同样地,伦敦种族混杂,而巴黎种族隔离,伦敦的种族隔离没有巴黎那么严重。South African apartheid determined people’s life paths from before birth. If you were a white embryo, you’d be fine. A black embryo wouldn’t. I remember, aged about 16, sitting on the porch of some ridiculous white adult fraud, listening to him preach about the stupidity of his black servants, and realising: this guy needs to believe he made his own success. Few people at the top can think, “Luckily, I chose the right parents.” Instead they tell themselves a story about work and talent – even though their maid probably outworks them, and nobody ever cared whether she had talent.南非的种族隔离在人们出生前就决定了他们的人生轨迹。如果你投胎为白人,你的人生将一路畅通,但如果投胎为黑人就不行了。我记得自己大约16岁时,坐在一个有些可笑的、伪善的白人的门廊上,听他唠叨他的黑仆如何愚蠢,心想:这家伙得相信他是靠自己成功的。上层人很少意识到,“太走运了,我投对了胎。”相反,他们用工作和才华这种故事来自欺欺人,哪怕他们的女仆很可能比他们辛苦得多,而且无人在乎她是否有才华。Inequality is the new apartheid. Your life path is largely determined before birth. The ruling classes pass on their status by sending their children to exclusive schools, much like in apartheid Johannesburg.不平等是新的种族隔离。你的人生轨迹在出生前就已基本决定。统治阶层通过将孩子送进贵族学校来传承自己的地位,这跟种族隔离的约翰内斯堡十分相似。Happily, ethnicity is no longer always decisive. Still, today’s apartheid delivers outcomes as unequal as the old apartheid did. One measure of a society’s inequality is its Gini coefficient. South Africa’s Gini in 1995, just after apartheid, was a shocking 0.59 (where 0 is perfect equality, and 1 is perfect inequality). But Manhattan today has almost exactly the same Gini: 0.6, according to the US Census Bureau. Amazingly, South Africa itself has become less equal since apartheid: by 2009 the country’s Gini had risen to 0.63, says the World Bank.幸运的是,种族已不再决定一切。但今天的隔离所产生的效果与旧的种族隔离制度一样不平等。衡量社会不平等的一个指标就是它的基尼系数。1995年,刚结束种族隔离制度之后的南非基尼系数很糟,为0.59(0代表完全平等,1代表完全不平等)。但根据美国人口普查局(US Census Bureau)的数据,曼哈顿今天的基尼系数几乎与之完全相同:0.6。令人惊奇的是,南非自己居然变得比种族隔离时期更加不平等,根据世界(World Bank)的数据,该国2009年基尼系数升到了0.63。Political talk today often sends me drifting back to apartheid. I remember white South African liberals bemoaning apartheid while the maid served supper. I grasped only recently (after ing Mark Gevisser’s excellent new book Dispatcher, about Johannesburg) that most of them didn’t want to end apartheid. They just liked talking liberal talk. It made them feel virtuous, and set them above peasants who actually believed in apartheid. In fact, apartheid liberals resemble liberals today who bemoan climate change while flying everywhere and not voting for parties that would tackle the problem (I know: I’m guilty too). As climate change gets forgotten, the latest fake liberals are the Davos types who bemoan inequality at billionaire-sponsored cocktail parties.当今的政治言论常常让我穿越时空,回到种族隔离时代。我想起那些一边享用女佣端上的晚餐,一边抱怨种族隔离的南非白人自由派人士。最近我读了马克#8226;格维瑟(Mark Gevisser)新出的有关约翰内斯堡的杰作《调度员》(Dispatcher)之后,才了解他们大多数人并不想终结种族隔离。他们只是喜欢空谈自由派的言论。这令他们产生高尚感,将他们置于那些信奉种族隔离的“农民”之上。事实上,种族隔离时期的自由派人士,跟今天那些一面抱怨气候变化,一面频频搭乘飞机出行,还不愿意投票持有意对付这一问题的政党的自由派人士(我知道,我也难逃其咎)如出一辙。随着气候变化渐渐被人们抛诸脑后,那些齐聚达沃斯、在亿万富翁赞助的鸡尾酒会上抱怨不平等的人成了最新的伪自由派人士。Still, South Africa showed me that progress can happen. Apartheid ended partly for the same reason why communism collapsed in 1989, and why inequality may yet diminish: the ruling class became ashamed. Apartheid’s demise taught me that politics matter, that individual politicians matter (the white regime trusted Nelson Mandela with the country) and that history never happens the way you expect. South Africa avoided civil war. Instead, as the old communist Albie Sachs told me, “The communists made the liberal revolution.” I’ve learnt that utopia never arrives: South Africa won’t ever be Switzerland. But it could become Chile.话虽如此,南非还是向我明了进步是可能发生的。种族隔离制度结束的原因,部分类似于东欧共产党政权在1989年垮台,它也是不平等有望减少的原因:统治阶层变得羞愧了。种族隔离制度的灭亡告诉我,政治是重要的,个别政治家可能扭转乾坤(白人政权信任纳尔逊#8226;曼德拉(Nelson Mandela)执掌国家),以及历史永远不按照你预期的道路发展。南非避免了内战。相反,正如老共产主义者阿尔比#8226;萨克斯(Albie Sachs)对我说的,“共产主义者开创了自由派革命。”我认识到乌托邦永远不会到来:南非永远不会变成瑞士,但它有可能变成智利。Some things have got better. Nesta, while working for my grandparents, simultaneously raised her own grandchildren in her house five hours away. This month she died, aged about 85. Her grandchildren buried her. She had worked them hard. They books. Several of them graduated from university. They have a slightly better chance in life than she did.有些事变得好一些了。奈丝塔的家离我祖父母家有5小时路程,她在为我祖父母工作的同时,在自己家养大了她的孙辈。她上个月过世了,享年85岁,她的孙辈们安葬了她。她教导他们勤奋上进。他们念过书,有些还念到大学毕业。相比她,他们的人生机会略好一些。 /201405/300416

  • 厦门驼峰鼻手术哪家好
  • 厦门著名的美容医院搜医门户
  • 在厦门背部吸脂哪家医院好爱信息
  • 厦门怎么能祛斑
  • 厦门欧菲附乳胸部乳房乳晕价格飞度乐园
  • 厦门除皱价格时空在线厦门哪家玻尿酸隆鼻医院好
  • 69问答厦门祛痘皮肤科
  • 导医媒体厦门妊娠纹怎样能消除99乐园
  • 厦门去黄褐斑价格
  • 厦门哪里有比较好的去疤痕整容院好网
  • 福建省厦门二院减肥手术多少钱平安口碑厦门一院整形
  • 厦门第二医院打美白针多少钱
  • 百姓助手厦门市欧菲整形网上咨询
  • 三明打美白针哪家医院好
  • 华专家厦门开外眼角大概多少钱好解答
  • 大河资讯厦门自锁托槽矫正
  • 海沧区祛斑医院哪个最好时空频道集美区吸脂减肥去哪家医院好
  • 城市大全在厦门欧菲医院痘痘放心时讯
  • 厦门隆胸材料哪种好飞度云新闻
  • 厦门玻璃酸注射隆胸
  • 厦门鼻头整形哪家医院好
  • 飞度面诊厦门宽鼻整形手术
  • 当当解答在厦门狐臭
  • 厦门哪家医院冰点除毛最好快乐专家
  • 厦门激光去雀斑样痣好不好
  • 厦门省妇幼医院激光点痣多少钱
  • 厦门市欧菲整形是公立还是私立
  • 福建妇女医院贵不贵度助手
  • 普及时讯厦门去疤痕色素
  • 思明区儿童医院是不是公立医院
  • 相关阅读
  • 瞒天过海!集体耕地上建厂房!村民:相关部门集体哑火(三)
  • 暮影战神武灵攻略大全
  • 唐嫣赵丽颖吴昕林允儿李易峰和谁最有感(图)
  • 酒类电商双罢斗
  • 南京查处违规补缴社保证明份购房证明被注销
  • 内蒙古自治区政协原副主席赵黎平一审被判处死刑
  • 近日李念与刚斩获年北京青年电影节影帝的巩峥出现在街边
  • 徐娇穿白袜撑伞古典韵味十足邻家有女初长成
  • 单机斗地主下载:首存优惠
  • 小学生作业本开口说话曝光盗伐林木团伙
  • 相关推荐

    发表回复

    请遵守天涯社区公约言论规则,不得违反国家法律法规