按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，银行应构建安全的 ，制定安全边界，防止第三方越界访问。___

小李在淘宝网上看中一件外套，在经过不断的对比后，小李终于下定决心购买这件外套，在付款过程中，小李通过某第三方支付平台链接其银行账户进行支付，在小李输入密码确认后，网络中断导致交易终止，根据《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，从银行账户划出的支付交易资金，遇到交易终止、失败后应 。___

近年来，“网购”成为时下年轻人时髦的消费方式，人们通过网络就可以足不出户选购自己心仪的商品，“网购”之所以能成为一种时尚的生活方式，离不开便捷的网络在线支付技术。随着在线支付技术的不断进步，第三方支付平台与商业银行开展更加紧密的合作。根据《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，下列说法正确的是 。___

某大学生申请出国留学需要网上支付各种费用，于是他在某银行申请开立了一张借记卡并同时开通了网上银行、手机银行等电子银行服务，根据《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，当其首次激活网上银行、手机银行并绑定第三方支付机构对外支付费用时，需要 。___

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》规定，商业银行开展同业业务实行_____。___

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》（银监办发〔2014〕140号）规定，本通知所称的同业业务是指中华人民共和国境内依法设立的金融机构之间开展的以_______为核心的各项业务。___

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》（银监办发〔2014〕140号）规定，将同业业务纳入_______管理，建立健全前中后台分设的内部控制机制，加强内部监督检查和责任追究，确保同业业务经营活动依法合规，风险得到有效控制。___

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》（银监办发〔2014〕140号）规定，商业银行违规开展同业业务的，银监会及其派出机构将按照违反_______规则进行查处。___

为集中规范管理同业业务，某银行成立了金融市场总部，主要开展同业拆借、同业借款、非结算性同业存款、同业代付、同业投资等业务。由于该行信息系统尚未全面升级，上述业务无法实现电子化交易，因此根据《银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》的规定，金融市场总部可以委托或授权分支机构开展哪些工作_________

按照《关于规范金融机构同业业务的通知》的规定， 是指经中国人民银行批准，进入全国银行间同业拆借市场的金融机构之间通过全国同一的同业拆借网络进行的无担保资金融通行为。___

按照《关于规范金融机构同业业务的通知》（银发〔2014〕127号）规定，本通知所称的同业业务是指中华人民共和国境内依法设立的金融机构之间开展的以_______为核心的各项业务。___

按照《关于规范金融机构同业业务的通知》（银发〔2014〕127号）规定，中国人民银行和_______依照法定职责，全面加强对同业业务的监督检查，对业务结构复杂、风险管理能力与业务发展不相适应的金融机构加大现场检查和专项检查力度，对违规开展同业业务的金融机构依法进行处罚。___

按照《关于规范金融机构同业业务的通知》（银发〔2014〕127号）规定，同业拆借业务是指经_______批准，进入全国银行间同业拆借市场的金融机构之间通过全国统一的同业拆借网络进行的无担保资金融通行为。___

按照《关于规范金融机构同业业务的通知》（银发〔2014〕127号）规定，单家商业银行对单一金融机构法人的不含结算性同业存款的同业融出资金，扣除风险权重为零的资产后的净额，不得超过该银行一级资本的_______。___

按照《关于规范金融机构同业业务的通知》（银发〔2014〕127号）规定，金融机构办理同业业务，应当合理审慎确定融资期限。其中，同业借款业务最长期限不得超过_______年，其他同业融资业务最长期限不得超过一年，业务到期后不得展期。___

某房产公司为甲银行的授信客户，甲银行碍于信贷规模限制无法直接贷款给该房产公司。为满足客户的融资需求，甲银行联系了当地合作的乙城商行，让乙城商行用自己的资金成立单一资金信托计划，并由该信托公司向房产公司定向发放信托贷款。根据《关于规范金融机构同业业务的通知》的规定，下列关于甲银行的说法正确的是_________

按照《中国银监会关于完善银行理财业务组织管理体系有关事项的通知》规定，以下不属于运营行为规范的是_______。___

按照《中国银监会关于完善银行理财业务组织管理体系有关事项的通知》规定，银行总行应设立专门的部门负责理财业务的经营活动，建立集中统一管理本行理财业务、制定各项规章制度的机制，具体包括：理财产品的研发设计、投资运作、成本核算、风险管理、合规审查、产品发行、_______等。___

依据《中国银监会关于完善银行理财业务组织管理体系有关事项的通知》规定，下列理财销售行为正确的是 。___

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行可以采用_______或内部评级法计算信用风险加权资产。___

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行申请采用内部评级法计量信用风险加权资产的，提交申请时内部评级法资产覆盖率应不低_______，并在三年内达到80%。___

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行计量各类表外项目的风险加权资产，应将表外项目名义金额乘以__________

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行非自用不动产的风险权重为__________

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行应当在年度结束后的______向银监会提交内部资本充足评估报告。___

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行______承担资本管理的首要责任。___

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定， 商业银行应从各级资本中对应扣除对_______的资本投资，若其存在资本缺口的，还应当扣除相应的资本缺口。___

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行应当在最低资本要求的基础上计提储备资本。储备资本要求为风险加权资产的2.5%，由_______来满足。___

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行采用内部评级法计量信用风险加权资产的，超额贷款损失准备可计入二级资本，但不得超过信用风险加权资产的__________

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行对境外主权和金融机构债权的风险权重，以所在国家或地区的外部信用评级结果为基准。对境外商业银行债权，注册地所在国家或地区的评级为AA-（含）以上的，风险权重为__________

按照《商业银行资本管理办法（试行）》规定，商业银行采用内部模型法，内部模型法覆盖率应不低于__________

根据《商业银行资本管理办法》的规定，作为国内系统重要性银行，龙达银行的资本充足率不得低于 ___

根据《商业银行资本管理办法》的规定，以下哪项不属于磐基银行的核心一级资本_________

按照《中国银监会关于中国银行业实施新监管标准的指导意见》规定，杠杆率监管标准即一级资本占调整后表内外资产余额的比例不低于_______。___

按照《中国银监会关于中国银行业实施新监管标准的指导意见》规定，贷款拨备率不低于_______，拨备覆盖率不低于_______。___

按照《中国银监会关于中国银行业实施新监管标准的指导意见》规定，董事会应负责新监管标准实施规划及有关重大政策审批，定期听取高级管理层汇报，对实施准备情况进行监督；_______负责制定新监管标准实施方案并组织实施。___

按照《中国银行业实施新监管标准的指导意见》，_______巴塞尔委员会发布了《第三版巴塞尔协议》（Basel III），并要求各成员经济体两年内完成相应监管法规的制定和修订工作。___

按照《商业银行与内部人和股东关联交易管理办法》规定，商业银行主要非自然人股东是指能够直接、间接、共同持有或控制商业银行_______以上股份获表决权的非自然人股东。___

按照《商业银行与内部人和股东关联交易管理办法》规定，关联交易控制委员会成员不得少于三人，并由_______担任负责人。___

按照《商业银行与内部人和股东关联交易管理办法》规定，重大关联交易应当由_______审查后，提交董事会批准。___

按照《商业银行与内部人和股东关联交易管理办法》规定，重大关联交易应当在批准之日起_______内报告监事会，同时报告中国银行业监督管理委员会。___

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.

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