在客观规律面前，人的主观能动性表现在___

事物的联系和运动之间的关系___

唯物辩证法的总特征是___

___

“割下来的手就不再是人手”这句话体现了___

唯物辩证法认为发展的实质是___

区分新事物和旧事物的标志在于看它们___

质量互变规律揭示了___

质和事物的存在是___

在实际工作中，要注意掌握分寸，防止“过”或“不及”，其关键在于___

区分量变和质变的根本标志是看___

量变的复杂性是指___

量变中的阶段性部分质变表现了___

量变中的局部性部分质变是___

揭示事物发展的趋势和道路的规律是___

“肯定和否定相互渗透，在一定意义上，肯定就是否定。”这是一种___

事物的否定方面是指___

作为辩证的否定的“扬弃”是___

辩证的否定是事物发展的环节,因为辩证的否定___

否定之否定规律___

事物发展的周期性体现了___

直线论的错误在于只看到___

循环论的错误在于___

对立统一规律揭示了___

唯物辩证法的实质和核心是___

辩证法所说的矛盾是指___

矛盾的基本属性是___

依据是___

矛盾问题的精髓是___

题的方法都是___

“任何个别（无论怎样）都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___

在唯物辩证法看来，水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___

“是就是是，不是就是不是，除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___

真象和假象的区别在于___

有的哲学家说，在大风扬起的尘土中，每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___

“或然率”是指___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___

贷后管理是指从贷款发放或其他信贷业务发生后直到本息收回的 全过程管理，主要包括贷后检查、风险预警、风险分类、信用收回等 内容

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，个人 客户信用等级分为AAA、AA、A、B四个等级类别

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，对信 用等级为A级（含）以上的客户，在利率和费率方面应给予一定的优 惠待遇

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，对信 用等级为B级的存量客户，应逐步压缩存量用信余额，直至退出

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，对信 用等级为C级的存量客户，要制定风险处置方案，最大限度保全债权， 降低损失

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，在贷 后管理中发现客户存在明显风险信号，可及时下调客户信用等级

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，授信 额度审批通过后，在有效期内原则上不得随意核增，确需核增的应重

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，个人 客户授信在实施过程中出现重大不利影响的预警信号，应对客户未使 用授信额度予以冻结，并压缩已使用额度，直至客户预警信号解除

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，对信 贷业务资料进行审查并撰写审查报告的审查人员是个人信贷业务的 审查主责任人

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，客户 经理在贷后检查中，对发现的风险预警信号无法有效处理的，应立即 上报分管行长（主任）研究风险处置措施，风险管理部门负责监督落实

根据《河南省农村信用社个人信贷业务操作规程》的规定，贷款 的展期期限加上原期限达到新的利率期限档次时，从展期之日起按照 新的期限档次利率执行且不低于原贷款利

向股票市场和“两高一剩”企业放款违背了信贷政策

银行可以以自身信用直接为房地产企业支付土地购置费用提供各 类表内外融资

《关于做好2018年银行业三农和扶贫金融服务工作的通知》（银 监办发〔2018〕46号）规定，限制对资源消耗高企业、负债率高企 业、产能严重过剩行业、地方政府融资平台和房地产等领域的新增信 贷投放，不得向农户发放“首付贷”、婚丧嫁娶等用途的贷款

《关于完善商业银行存款偏离度管理有关事项的通知》银保监办 发〔2018〕48号规定，商业银行不得设立时点性存款规模考评指标， 也不得设定以存款市场份额、排名或同业比较为要求的考评指标，分 支机构不得层层加码提高考评标准及相关指标要求

视贷款收回情况再做进一步处理

对未落实贷后管理规定，导致贷款诉讼时效丧失的，对直接责任 人一律停岗、停职，视贷款收回情况再做进一步处理

到 2020 年，乡村振兴取得重要进展，制度框架和政策体系基本形成。到 2035 年，乡村振兴取得决定性进展，农业农村现代化基本实现。到 2050 年，乡村全面振兴，（）、（）、（）富全面实现。___

深化供给侧结构性改革，要坚持去产能、（）、（）、（）、（），优化存量资源配置，扩大优质增量供给，实现供需动态平衡。___

加强社会保障体系建设，要坚持房子是用来住的，不是用来炒的定位，加快建立（）的住房制度，让全体人民住有所居。___

近年来，“两个责任”成为腐败犯罪治理的重要方式，其中两个责任是指（）。___

深化供给侧结构性改革，要建设（）、（）、（）劳动者大军，弘扬劳模精神和工匠精神，营造劳动光荣的社会风尚和精益求精的敬业风气。___

加快建设创新型国家，要深化科技体制改革，建立（）的技术创新体系，加强对中小企业创新的支持，促进科技成果转化。___

出台中央八项规定，严厉整治（ ），坚决反对特权。___

全党要更加自觉地增强（ ），既不走封闭僵化的老路，也不走改旗易帜的邪路，保持政治定力，坚持实干兴邦，始终坚持和发展中国特色社会主义。___

党政军民学，东西南北中，当时领导一切的，必须增强（ ），自觉维护党中央权威和集中统一领导，自觉在思想上行动上同党中央保持高度一致。___

中国特色社会主义事业“五位一体 ”总体布局包括哪些内容？___

必须坚持以人民为中心的发展思想，坚持（ ）的发展理念。___

新时代中国特色社会主义思想，是（ ），必须长期坚持并不断发展。___

新时代坚持和发展中国特色社会主义的基本方略是（ ）。___

新形势下，我们党面临的几大危险是（ ）。___

中国特色社会主义事业“四个全面 ”战略布局包括哪些内容？___

实施乡村振兴战略。（）问题是关系国计民生的根本性问题，必须始终把解决好“三农”问题作为全党工作重中之重。___

我国经济已由高速增长阶段转向高质量发展阶段，正处在（）的攻关期。___

实施乡村振兴战略，要坚持农业农村优先发展，按照产业兴旺、（）的总要求，建立健全城乡融合发展体制机制和政策体系，加快推进农业农村现代化。___

实施乡村振兴战略，要构建现代农业（），完善农业支持保护制度，发展多种形式适度规模经营，培育新型农业经营主体，健全农业社会化服务体系，实现小农户和现代农业发展有机衔接。___

实施乡村振兴战略，要加强农村基层工作基础，健全（）相结合的乡村治理体系。___

实施乡村振兴战略，要巩固和完善（）。保持土地承包关系稳定并长久不变，第二轮土地承包到期后再延长三十年。___

夺取反腐败斗争压倒性胜利，要（），坚决防止党内形成利益集团。___

精准扶贫“五个一批”是指发展生产脱贫一批（ ）。___