“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?___

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 can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___

大学生的成才目标是___。

现代人才素质的灵魂是___。

___是人才素质的基础.

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于推进简政放权改进市场准入工作有关事项的通知》规定，除同级转岗和中管银行业金融机构“三长”正职之间的转任不再进行专业考试外，其余均应按照“三考”程序规范操作

根据银监会《关于银行建立小企业金融服务专营机构的指导意见》的规定，小企业金融服务专营机构可申请单独颁发金融许可证和营业执照

根据银监会《关于银行建立小企业金融服务专营机构的指导意见》的规定，各银行设立专营机构，应建立独立的激励约束机制。对小企业金融服务的业绩考核要独立于其他银行业务，制定专门的业绩考核和奖惩机制，加大资源配置力度，注重经营绩效和风险管理相结合，探索多种激励约束方式

根据银监会《关于银行建立小企业金融服务专营机构的指导意见》的规定，各银行设立专营机构，应建立独立有效的风险管理机制。采取与小企业性质、规模相适应的风险管理技术，对授信调查、授信审批、贷款发放、风险分类、风险预警、不良资产处置等各个环节的风险进行管控

根据银监会《关于银行建立小企业金融服务专营机构的指导意见》的规定，各银行设立专营机构，应根据小企业的特点和实际业务情况设立合理的风险容忍度。同时，建立授信尽职免责制度，在考核整体质量及综合回报的基础上，根据实际情况和有关规定追究或免除有关当事人的相应责任，做到尽职者免责，失职者问责

达信银行将新设立的小企业金融服务专营机构命名为达信快捷贷综合服务中心。依据《中国银监会关于银行建立小企业金融服务专营机构的指导意见》，该专营机构命名是否正确？

根据银监会办公厅《关于银行业金融机构分支机构变更营业场所问题的通知》规定，乡镇金融机构分支机构营业场所不得跨乡镇变更

根据银监会办公厅《关于银行业金融机构分支机构变更营业场所问题的通知》规定，同城支行可以在同一城市内变更营业场所

根据银监会办公厅《关于银行业金融机构分支机构变更营业场所问题的通知》规定，分行级专营机构可以在同一城市内变更营业场所

根据银监会办公厅《关于银行业金融机构分支机构变更营业场所问题的通知》规定，外资银行营业性机构的分支机构在境内同一行政区划内变更营业场所，适用事前报告制

根据银监会办公厅《关于银行业金融机构分支机构变更营业场所问题的通知》规定，银行业金融机构分支机构变更营业场所的，应直接向所在地银监局或银监分局报告

根据银监会办公厅《关于银行业金融机构分支机构变更营业场所问题的通知》规定，非银行金融机构的营业性分支机构迁址使用事前审批制

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，“自助银行＋人”的咨询型网点可以参照自助银行无需履行准入审批程序

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，为支持社区支行服务社区、服务小微，鼓励社区支行办理现金业务

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，社区支行、小微支行终止营业的，在向机构所在地银监分局或所在城市银监局报告后即可终止营业或转为自助银行

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，中小商业银行应按照“定位社区、服务小微、规划先行、均衡设置、持续经营”的思路推进社区支行、小微支行建设

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，社区支行、小微支行应按许可的经营范围展业，不得将业务外包

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，社区支行、小微支行高管人员需要进行任职资格审核

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，社区支行、小微支行设立无需履行相关行政审批程序

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，自助银行配备银行从业人员值守并提供咨询服务，不属于通知界定的社区支行、小微支行范畴，不需提出设立申请，履行准入程序

某商业银行A市分行拟在本市设立5个社区支行，依据《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行、小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，该行A市分行可以一次性向相关监管部门提出申请

A银行在本市某社区设立了社区支行，三个月后发现该社区内客户的规模和消费习惯不太适合设立社区支行。依据《中国银监会办公厅关于中小商业银行设立社区支行、小微支行有关事项的通知》规定，A银行可以报相关监管部门批准将该社区银行改为自助银行

按照《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，民间资本进入银行业应当与其他各类资本同等遵守法律、行政法规和规章有关投资银行业金融机构的持股比例、投资机构数量等审慎规定

按照《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，“四单原则”是指：单列信贷计划、单独配置人力和财务资源、单独客户评定与信贷评审、单独会计核算

按照《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，在市场准入实际工作中，不得单独针对民间资本进入银行业设置限制条件或其他附加条件

按照《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，引导银行业金融机构加强与企业的互利合作，推动小型微型企业信用体系建设，改善民营企业特别是民营小型微型企业融资环境

按照《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，支持银行业金融机构优化现有农村地区网点布局，将在当地所吸收的可贷资金主要用于城镇地区发放贷款

按照《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，严格限制银行业金融机构对中型小型微型企业收取财物顾问费、咨询费等费用

某民营企业拟参与村镇银行的发起设立，拟持股15％，该行为不符合《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》的规定

按照《中国银监会关于加强商业银行股权质押管理的通知》规定，商业银行可以接受本行股权作为质押物

按照《中国银监会关于加强商业银行股权质押管理的通知》的规定：商业银行董事会、高管层要在保障股东合法权利的同时，从构建银行良好公司治理、维护银行健康运行的角度，将规范银行股权质押管理纳入公司治理和风险防控范畴，切实履行职责，确保各项监管要求落到实处

按照《中国银监会关于加强商业银行股权质押管理的通知》的规定：在风险可控的前提下，经本行董事会同意，商业银行可以接受本行的股权作为质物

按照《中国银监会关于加强商业银行股权质押管理的通知》的规定：商业银行要主动加强与有关部门和机构的沟通。协调司法部门和拍卖机构支持银行董事会工作，完善银行股权质押登记程序。协调工商管理部门、证券登记结算机构，确保参与本行股权公开拍卖的竞拍人资质符合监管政策要求。协调股权集中托管机 构提高服务水平，强化信息披露

按照《中国银监会关于加强商业银行股权质押管理的通知》的规定：商业银行要规范开展股权质押授信业务。在风险可控的情况下，商业银行可以接受本行的股权作为质物

某建设集团公司是某股份制银行的股东，且在该银行拥有监事席位。依据《中国银监会关于加强股权质押管理的通知》规定，该公司出质该银行股份，需要事前向该行监事会申请备案，说明出质的原因、股权数额、质押期限、质押权人等基本情况

甲方（科技集团公司）持有乙方（股份制银行）3%股份。2014年6月，甲方将乙方的股权出质给丙方（某村镇银行）申请贷款。依据《中国银监会关于加强股权质押管理的通知》规定，甲方应当严格遵守法律法规和监管部门的要求，并应于事前告知乙方董事会

某通讯集团公司是甲方（城商行）的股东，其持有甲方的股权（2013年度）经审计的净值为5000万元。截至2014年6月，该公司在甲方贷款余额为1亿元。此时，该公司拟以甲方的股权质押给乙方（股份制银行），向乙方申请贷款。依据《中国银监会关于加强股权质押管理的通知》要求，该公司不得将甲方股权质押给乙方，需另寻其他担保措施

按照《银行业金融机构从业人员职业操守指引（修订）》规定，银行业金融机构从业人员在执行上级指令时，如发现可能发生违章违纪行为，或可能导致风险时，可越级上报

按照《银行业金融机构从业人员职业操守指引（修订）》规定，办理授信、资信调查、融资等业务的从业人员，在涉及亲属关系时，可不用回避

按照《银行业金融机构从业人员职业操守指引（修订）》规定，银行业金融机构从业人员在社会交往和商业活动中，应廉洁从业，不得接受或给予客户任何形式的非法利益