/第八章/第二节 多选题 把对外开放作为我国必须长期坚持的一项基本国策，所依据的邓小平提出的重要观点是___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 把对外开放作为一项基本国策，主要基于___考察把外开放的作为基本国策的理由 难 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 改革开放30多年来，我国逐步形成了开放型经济。其顺序是 ___ 考察开放性经济形成的顺序 难 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 改革开放30多年来，中国始终不渝地坚持对外开放基本国策，形成了具有中国特色的对外开放。具有中国特色的对外开放道路包括___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 全面提高开放型经济水平，要 ___中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 新常态下，我国经济发展的主要特点是___ 易 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 党的十八届三中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面深化改革若干重大问题的决定》提出，允许更多国有经济和其他所有制经济发展成为混合所有制经济，并将混合所有制经济明确为基本经济制度的重要实现形式。混合所有制经济___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 从遥远的古代，我国各族人民共同开发祖国的河山，建立了紧密的___联系，两千多年前就形成了幅员辽阔的统一国家。 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 国家统一思想对推动我国多民族统一国家的形成和发展起到了巨大作用，强烈的国家统一观念逐渐成为中华民族的心理习惯，成为___的重要精神力量。 提干不涉及“世界” 难 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 实现祖国完全统一是中华民族伟大复兴的___ 易 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 中共十八届三中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面深化改革若干重大问题的决定》，把市场在资源配置中的“基础性作用”修改为“决定性作用”。对市场在资源配置中所起作用的这一新定位，有利于___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 中共十八届三中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面深化改革若干重大问题的决定》之所以把市场在资源配置中的“基础性作用”修改为“决定性作用”，是因为___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 确立公有制为主体，多种所有制经济共同发展的基本经济制度的基本依据是___ 易 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 中共十八届三中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面深化改革若干重大问题的决定》提出，坚持和完善公有制为主体、多种所有制经济共同发展的基本经济制度。以下关于这一基本经济制度的选项，内容正确的是___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 坚持稳步推进两岸关系全面发展，就要___ 易 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 实现祖国完全统一是中华民族伟大复兴的___ 易 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 中共十八届三中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面深化改革若干重大问题的决定》，把市场在资源配置中的“基础性作用”修改为“决定性作用”。对市场在资源配置中所起作用的这一新定位，有利于___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 中共十八届三中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面深化改革若干重大问题的决定》之所以把市场在资源配置中的“基础性作用”修改为“决定性作用”，是因为___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 确立公有制为主体，多种所有制经济共同发展的基本经济制度的基本依据是___ 易 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 中共十八届三中全会通过的《中共中央关于全面深化改革若干重大问题的决定》提出，坚持和完善公有制为主体、多种所有制经济共同发展的基本经济制度。以下关于这一基本经济制度的选项，内容正确的是___ 中 4

/第八章/第二节 多选题 坚持稳步推进两岸关系全面发展，就要___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 关于人民当家作主的说法正确的是___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 人民民主专政实质上是无产阶级专政，原因在于它与无产阶级专政在___方面相同 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 关于中国特色社会主义民主政治，以下说法正确的是___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 中国现阶段的人民民主专政实质上是无产阶级专政，这主要表现在人民民主专政与无产阶级专政___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 在中国实行人民代表大会制度，是___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 在中国实行人民代表大会制度，符合中国国情。作为我国政体和人民当家作主的根本政治制度的人民代表大会制度___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 做好人民政协工作，必须坚持人民政协的性质定位。人民政协是___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 实践证明，中国共产党领导的多党合作和政治协商制度能够在中国特色社会主义共同目标下，把中国共产党领导和多党派合作有机结合起来，实现___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 在当今世界许多地区民族冲突迭起的情况下，我国各族人民和睦相处，共同建设有中国特色的社会主义，这是因为我国___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 新疆和西藏几十年来的发展证明，民族区域自治制度符合各民族人民的共同利益和发展要求。民族区域自治制度___ 易 4

/第十章/第二节 多选题 改革开放以来，我国已经建立了基层民主自治体系，其主要内容有___ 易 4

/第十章/第三节 多选题 下列构成社会主义核心价值体系的基本内容的有___ 易 4

/第十章/第三节 多选题 下列属于社会主义核心价值体系的基本内容的是___ 中 4

/第十章/第三节 多选题 发挥人民在文化建设中的主体作用，坚持___ 易 4

/第十章/第三节 多选题 建设社会主义文化强国，需要发挥文化的___作用。 文化的作用 难 4

/第十章/第三节 多选题 坚持中国特色社会主义文化发展道路，必须___如何坚持中国特色社会主义文化发展道路 难 4

/第十章/第三节 多选题 建设社会主义文化强国，是___ 难 4

/第十章/第三节 多选题 社会主义核心价值体系与社会主义核心价值观方向一致，表现在___ 易 4

/第十章/第三节 多选题 核心价值观和核心价值体系都坚持重在建设，就是要___ 细节理解 难 4

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___

判别什么样的人生才有意义___

下列人生态度中正确的是___

下列属于正确的人生目的的是___

___认为,金钱可以主宰一切.

___ 认为，社会和他人是达到个人目的的手段。

___认为，人生的全部内容就在于满足感官的需求与快乐。

马克思对于人的本质的论断确立与___

人与自然关系的实质是___

在社会交往和公共生活中公民应该遵守的道德准则是___

社会公德最基本的要求是___