"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：预应力钢筋（钢丝、钢绞线）的重量按设计图示结构物内的长度乘理论单位重量计算，不含___

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：施工中的___，应由投标人在投标报价时考虑，计入综合单价，不单独计量。

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：下列___应采用地基处理的清单子目计量。

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：支挡结构包括___等工程。

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：预应力锚索单独计量，包括___。

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：制架梁铺助设施包括___。

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：隧道及明洞工程中，下列___不单独计量。

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：修建房屋进行的___等土石方，不单独计量，其费用计入房屋基础及附属工程的有关清单子目

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：工程保险包括___。

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：下列___是属于人工费的内容。

"2007铁路工程工程量清单计价指南（土建部分）：暂列金额包括___。

"铁路预算定额[2017]33号路基工程规定：下列___可套用B类控制爆破定额。

"铁路预算定额[2017]33号桥梁工程规定：顶进框架式桥涵身重量包括___。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，建设工程发承包及实施阶段的工程造价应由___组成。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，招标工程量清单、招标控制价、___应由具有专专业资格的工程造价人员承担。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，建设工程发承包及实施阶段的计价活动应遵循___的原则

"根据GB50500-2013规定，分部工程是单项或单位工程的组成部分，是按___及将单项或单位工程划分为若干分部的工程。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，分项工程是分部工程的组成部分，是按不同___等将分部工程划分为若干个分项或项目的工程。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，措施项目为完成工程项目施工，发生于该工程施工准备和施工过程中的___、环境保护等方面的项目。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，综合单价是完成一个规定清单项目所需的___以及一定范围内的风险费用。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，工程成本是承包人为实施合同工程并达到质量标准，在确保安全施工的前提下，必须消耗或使用的___施工机械台班及其管理等方面发生的费用和按规定缴纳的规费和税金。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，工程造价指数反映一定时期的工程造价相对于某一固定时期的工程造价变化程度的比值或比率。包括按单位或单项工程划分的造价指数，按工程造价构成要素划分的___等价格指数。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，工程变更是合同工程实施过程中由发包人提出或由承包人提出经发包人批准的合同工程任何一项工作的增、减、取消或施工工艺___招标工程量清单的错、漏从而引起合同条件的改变或工程量的增减变化。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，暂列金额是招标人在工程量清单中暂定并包括在合同价款中的一笔款项。用于工程合同签订时尚未确定或者不可预见的所需___施工中可能发生的工程变更、合同约定调整因素出现时的合同价款调整以及发生的索赔、现场签证确认等的费用。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，总承包服务费是总承包人为配合协调发包人进行的专业工程发包，对发包人自行采购的___等进行保管以及施工现场管理、竣工资料汇总整理等服务所需的费用。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，安全文明施工费是在合同履行过程中，承包人按照国家法律、法规、标准等规定，为保证___等所采用的措施而发生的费用。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，工程设备是指构成或计划构成永久工程一部分的___其他类似的设备和装置。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，企业定额是施工企业根据本企业的___而编制的人工、材料和施工机械台班等消耗标准。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，税金是国家税法规定的应计人建筑安装工程造价内的___。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，工程结算是发承包双方根据合同约定，对合同工程在实施中、终止时、已完工后进行的合同价款计算、调整和确认。包括___。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，预付款是在开工前，发包人按照合同约定，预先支付给承包人用于购买合同工程施工所需的___等的款项。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，发包人提供的甲供材料如规格、数量或质量不符合合同要求，或由于发包人原因发生___等情况的，发包人应承担由此增加的费用和（或）工期延误，并应向承包人支付合理利润。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，由于承包人使用___ 等自身原因造成施工费用增加的，应由承包人全部承担。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，分部分项工程项目清单必须根据相关工程现行国家计量规范规定的___、顶特征和规则进行编制。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，合同价款调整是在合同价款调整因素出现后，发承包双方根据合同约定，对合同价款进行变动___。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，工程造价鉴定是工程造价咨询人接受___委托，对施工合同纠纷案件中的工程造价争议，运用专门知识进行鉴别、判断和评定，并提供鉴定意见的活动。也称为工程造价司法鉴定。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，承包人为履行合同所发生或将要发生的所有合理开支，包括___，但不包括利润。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，竣工结算办理完毕，发殳包人应将竣工结算文件报送工程所在地或有该工程管辖权的行业管理部门的工程造价管理机构备案，竣工结算文件应作为___的必备文件。

"根据GB50500-2013规定，由于不可抗力致使合同无法履行解除合同的，发包人应向承包人支付合同解除之日前已完工程但尚未支付的合同价款，此外，还应支付下列金额：___

"根据GB50500-2013规定，结算款支付是承包人应根据办理的竣工结算文件向发包人提交竣工结算款支付申请。申请应包括下列___：

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___

通过其规定和实施，影响人们思想，培养和提高人们法律意识，引导人们依法行为的作用是法律的___

有序的公共生活是构建和谐社会的___

一行人在过路口时迎面遇到红灯，看到近处没有车辆便径直通过。他这样做是___

任何一个社会成员，无论具有何种身份、职业和地位，都必须在公共生活中遵守社会公德。这体现了社会公德具有的___特点。

影响公共生活、公共秩序、文明礼貌、清洁卫生以及其他影响社会生活的最主要行为规范是___

《公民道德建设实施纲要》明确指出，社会公德涵盖了___