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。

___是人才素质的综合体现.

人们对生活在其中的世界及人与世界的关系的总的看法和根本观点就是___

人生观的核心是___

人的本质属性是___

社会主义社会人生价值标准是___

回答人为什么活着___

表明人应当怎样对待生活___

关于限期出境，下列说法正确的是___。

某局刑警大队侦查人员张某、王某在办理一起抢劫案件时，先后对犯罪嫌疑人杨某、朱某进行了讯问，因杨某拒不交代犯罪事实，即采取不让其睡觉的体罚方法获取了杨某的口供。按照杨某的口供，张某、王某在杨某家中提取了抢劫所用的匕首，并根据杨某供述的抢劫地点调取了被抢劫银行的监控录像，其间，侦查人员张某发现该案的犯罪嫌疑人朱某系自己的初中同学，遂要求回避。本案中可以作为证据使用的是___。

未成年人郭某涉嫌犯罪被检察院批准逮捕。在审查起诉中，经羁押必要性审查，拟变更为取保候审并适用保证人保证。关于保证人，下列说法错误的是___。

下列___犯罪，办案机关应当采取保护措施保障证人及其近亲属的人身安全。

下列关于办理刑事案件中鉴定的说法，错误的有___。

对治安案件进行审核、审批时，应当审查___。

王某因违反治安管理被公安机关处以500元罚款，超过缴纳期限后王某拒不缴纳罚款。公安机关可以___。

张三因扰乱公共场所秩序于2月1日被处200元罚款。4月18日张三去缴纳罚款，结果又被加处罚款372元。下列说法正确的是___。

下列有关治安管理处罚决定的表述正确的是___。

对于非法摘取他人器官的行为，以故意伤害罪或故意杀人罪定罪处罚的有___。

下列行为构成强迫交易罪的是___。

关于非法出售发票罪，下列表述正确的是___。

虚开增值税专用发票罪的客观方面表现为___。

行政法规可以设定的行政强制措施有___。

外国人戴维因非法持有毒品违反治安管理，被处行政拘留15日。关于办理该案，下列说法正确的是___。

下列对外国人处驱逐出境的说法正确的是___。

被遣送出境的外国人可以被遣送至的国家或者地区是___。

下列关于办理治安案件中担保人的说法正确的是___。

公安机关办理行政案件中，下列情形可以对涉及的物品予以扣押的是___。

公安机关办理行政案件中，对下列财物应当追缴的是___。

办理治安案件中，下列关于询问说法正确的是___。

根据《公安机关办理行政案件程序规定》的规定，下列关于询问的做法正确的是___。

南某与曾某素来不和。一天中午，两人因公用水池用水问题发生争执，并相互扭打，被邻居拉开。南某的丈夫孙某下班回家后，听说妻子与曾某吵架，拉起妻子找到曾某骂架，并捡起过道上的一根木棒递给妻子南某，说：“揍她。”南某乘曾某不备，拿起木棒便往曾某背上砸去，造成曾某背部损伤，经鉴定系轻微伤。下列对南某及其丈夫孙某处罚的表述正确的是___。

甲（13周岁）在一饭店内过生日时与店内服务员乙发生矛盾，甲气愤不过，于晚9时许，约其朋友丙（14周岁）、丁（14周岁）一起在乙回家途中，对乙进行了殴打。打完后，三人各自回家，丁在回家的路上越想越怕，便返回将躺在地上的乙送到了医院，并支付了医药费，乙出院后报警，要求处理甲、丙、丁三人，乙后经法医鉴定为轻微伤。对此案件，公安机关应当___。

下列关于办理治安案件询问的表述正确的是___。

谢某和朋友聚餐时与邻桌的林某发生争执，并用茶壶将林某打伤，致林某左眼失明，经鉴定属重伤。在公安机关侦查过程中，谢某提出该案侦查人员吴某是被害人林某的舅舅，要求其回避，下列处理正确的是___。

公安机关侦破一起共同盗窃案件，其中有4名犯罪嫌疑人：甲、乙、丙、丁。在侦查过程中，公安机关对4名犯罪嫌疑人的处理错误的是___。

胡某因涉嫌刑讯逼供罪被S县人民检察院决定取保候审，并交由S县公安局N派出所负责执行，以下说法正确的是___。

林某因涉嫌强奸罪被公安机关拘传，公安机关下列做法中正确的是___。

下列行为构成妨害信用卡管理罪的是___。

下列是操纵证券、期货市场罪具体行为的是___。

对破坏居（村）民委员会选举秩序的行为，应当按破坏选举秩序的有关规定给予治安管理处罚。

《治安管理处罚法》第18条规定的单位违反治安管理情形中的“单位”是指公司、企业、事业单位、机关、团体。

外国人A在中国境内实施了殴打他人行为，根据《治安管理处罚法》的规定，公安机关4、可以对其违法行为单独适用限期出境或驱逐出境。

监督管理计算机信息系统的安全保护工作，是公安机关人民警察的职责。

维护国（边）境地区的治安秩序，不是公安机关人民警察的职责。

人民警察对超越法律、法规规定的人民警察职责范围的指令，有权拒绝执行，并同时向同级公安机关督察部门报告。

犯罪分子虽然不具有《刑法》规定的减轻处罚情节，但是根据案件的特殊情况，经高级人民法院批准，也可以在法定刑以下判处刑罚。

甲因犯非法持有毒品罪被判处有期徒刑5年，执行4年后被减刑释放。释放后第4年又因涉嫌重大责任事故罪被判处有期徒刑2年。甲系累犯。

陈某于某晚潜入胡某家中盗窃贵重物品时，被主人发现。陈某夺门而逃，胡某也没有再追赶。陈某就躲在胡某家墙根处的草垛里睡了一晚，第二天早上村长高某路过时，发现陈某行踪诡秘，就对其盘问。陈某以为高某发现了自己昨晚的盗窃行为，就对高某进行打击，致其重伤。陈某构成盗窃罪、故意伤害罪，应数罪并罚。