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.

世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。

在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可，统一存在的，其中处于主导地位的是___。

时代精神的内涵十分丰富，其中___居于核心地位。

民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。

下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。

___是人才素质的基本内容

10。___是我们立党立国的根本指导思想

衡量大学生全面发展的一个重要标准是___

独立生活意识指___

___作为社会主义核心价值体系的精髓，解决的是应当具备什么样的精神状态和精神风貌的问题。

在中华人民共和国境内，建立计量基准器具、计量标准器具，进行计量检定，制造、修理、销售、使用计量器具，必须遵守《中华人民共和国计量法》

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，省级计量行政部门负责建立各种计量基准器具，作为统一全国量值的最高依据

《中华人民共和国计量法》第八条规定，企业、事业单位根据需要，可以建立本单位使用的计量标准器具，其各项最高计量标准器具经有关人民政府计量行政部门主持考核合格后使用

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，计量检定必须执行计量检定规程。国家计量检定规程由国务院计量行政部门制定。没有国家计量检定规程的，由国务院有关主管部门和省、自治区、直辖市人民政府计量行政部门分别制定部门计量检定规程和地方计量检定规程

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，任何单位和个人不得违反规定制造、销售和进口非法定计量单位的计量器具

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，制造、修理计量器具的企业、事业单位，必须具有与所制造、修理的计量器具相适应的设施、人员和检定仪器设备

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，使用计量器具不得破坏其精密度，损害国家和消费者的利益

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，县级以上人民政府计量行政部门应当依法对制造、修理、销售、进口和使用计量器具，以及计量检定等相关计量活动进行监督检查。有关单位和个人不得拒绝、阻挠

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，县级以上人民政府计量行政部门可以根据需要设置计量检定机构，或者授权其他单位的计量检定机构，执行强制检定和其他检定、测试任务

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，属于强制检定范围的计量器具，未按照规定申请检定或者检定不合格继续使用的，责令停止使用，可以并处没收

《中华人民共和国计量法》规定，使用不合格的计量器具或者破坏计量器具准确度，给国家和消毒者造成损失的，责令赔偿损失，没收计量器具和违法所得，可以并处罚款。

《中华人民共和国标准化法》规定，国家标准分为强制性标准、推荐性标准，行业标准、地方标准是强制性标准

《中华人民共和国标准化法》规定，国家鼓励企业、社会团体和教育、科研机构等开展或者参与标准化工作

《中华人民共和国标准化法》规定，强制性标准文本根据需要免费向社会公开。国家推动免费向社会公开推荐性标准文本

《中华人民共和国标准化法》规定，国家鼓励社会团体、企业制定高于推荐性标准相关技术要求的团体标准、企业标准

《中华人民共和国标准化法》第十八条规定，国家鼓励学会、协会、商会、联合会、产业技术联盟等社会团体协调相关市场主体共同制定满足市场和创新需要的团体标准，由本团体成员约定采用或者按照本团体的规定供社会强制采用

《中华人民共和国标准化法》规定，推荐性国家标准、行业标准、地方标准、团体标准、企业标准的技术要求不得高于强制性国家标准的相关技术要求

《中华人民共和国标准化法》规定，生产、销售、进口产品或者提供服务不符合强制性标准，或者企业生产的产品、提供的服务不符合其公开标准的技术要求的，依法承担民事责任

《中华人民共和国价格法》规定，经营者应当努力改进生产经营管理， 降低生产经营成本，为消费者提供价格合理的商品和服务，并在市场竞争中获取最大利润

《中华人民共和国价格法》第三条规定，国家实行并逐步完善宏观经济调控下主要由企业形成价格的机制

《中华人民共和国价格法》规定，价格的制定应当符合价值规律，大多数商品和服务价格实行市场调节价，极少数商品和服务价格实行政府指导价或者政府定价

《中华人民共和国价格法》规定，经营者应当根据其经营条件建立、健全内部价格管理制度，准确记录与核定商品和服务的生产经营成本，不得弄虚作假

《中华人民共和国价格法》规定，经营者销售、收购商品和提供服务， 应当按照政府价格主管部门的规定明码标价，注明商品的品名、产地、规格、等级、计价单位、价格或者服务的项目、收费标准等有关情况

《中华人民共和国价格法》规定，经营者不得在标价之外加价出售商品， 不得收取任何的费用

《中华人民共和国价格法》第三十三条规定，县级以上人民政府价格主管部门，依法对价格活动进行监督检查，并依照本法的规定对价格违法行为实施行政处罚

《中华人民共和国价格法》规定，任何单位和个人均有权对价格违法行为进行举报。政府价格主管部门应当对举报者给予鼓励，并负责为举报者保密

《中华人民共和国价格法》第四十一条 规定，经营者因价格违法行为致使消费者或者其他经营者多付价款的，应当退还多付部分；造成损害的， 应当依法承担赔偿责任

《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法实施条例》规定，人民法院、人民检察院以及行政执法部门依法查封、扣押的机动车，市场监督管理部门不予办理机动车登记

《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法实施条例》第十二条规定，税务部门、保险机构不可以在公安机关交通管理部门的办公场所集中办理与机动车有 关的税费缴纳、保险合同订立等事项

《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法实施条例》第十三条规定，机动车号牌应当悬挂在车前、车后指定位置，保持清晰、完整

《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法实施条例》规定，摩托车4年以内每2年检验 1 次；超过 4 年的，每年检验 1 次

《中华人民共和国道路交通安全法实施条例》第十七条规定，已注册登记的机动车进行安全技术检验时，机动车行驶证记载的登记内容与该机动车的有关情况不符，或者未按照规定提供机动车登记证书的，不予通过检验

《校车安全管理条例》第十七条规定，取得校车标牌的车辆应当配备统一的校车标志灯和停车指示标志。校车未运载学生上道路行驶的，不得使用校车标牌、校车标志灯和停车指示标志

《校车安全管理条例》第二十二条规定，配备校车的学校和校车服务提供者应当按照国家规定做好校车的安全维护，建立安全维护档案，保证校车处于良好技术状态。不符合安全技术条件的校车，应当停运维修，消除安全隐患

《校车安全管理条例》规定，伪造、变造或者使用伪造、变造的校车标牌的，由交通运输部门收缴伪造、变造的校车标牌，扣留该机动车，处 2000元以上 5000 元以下的罚款

《中华人民共和国计量法实施细则》第十三条规定，计量检定工作应当符合经济合理、就地就近的原则，不受行政区划和部门管辖的限制

《中华人民共和国计量法实施细则》第十一条规定，使用实行强制检定的计量标准的单位和个人，应当向主持考核该项计量标准的有关人民政府计量行政部门申请设备标定

《中华人民共和国计量法实施细则》第二十五条规定，任何单位和个人不准在工作岗位上使用无检定合格印、证或者超过检定周期以及经检定不合格的计量器具。在教学示范中使用计量器具不受此限

《中华人民共和国计量法实施细则》第五十条规定，使用不合格计量器具或者破坏计量器具准确度和伪造数据，给国家和消费者造成损失的，责令其赔偿损失，没收计量器具和全部违法所得，可并处二千元以下的罚款

《中华人民共和国计量法实施细则》所称的计量认证是指政府计量行政 部门对有关技术机构计量检定、测试的能力和可靠性进行的考核和证明