.5.近年来，中共中央印发___，中办、国办印发《关于加强人民政协协商民主建设的实施意见》、《关于加强城乡社区协商的意见》、《关于加强政党协商的实施意见》等配套文件，这些文件的出台标志着我国协商民主制度体系基本建成。第5题答案.

17.尊重人民___，尊重群众首创精神，紧紧依靠人民推进协商民主，最大程度吸纳人民参与协商民主。第17题答案.

19.开展___是推进人大制度完善发展、提升人大工作质量和水平的重要抓手。第19题答案.

20.加强人民政协制度建设，提高政协委员政治把握能力、___、联系群众能力、合作共事能力。第20题答案.

1.中国特色社会主义最本质的特征是___，中国特色社会主义制度的最大优势是中国共产党领导。第1题答案.

2.我们党始终高举马克思主义伟大旗帜，把实现社会主义、共产主义作为奋斗目标，历经革命、建设和改革的锤炼，已经锻造为成熟的___。第2题答案.

3.历史深重的轨迹清晰表明，没有共产党，就没有新中国；没有共产党，就没有中华民族从___。第3题答案.

4.坚持党对___的领导是实现中华民族伟大复兴的根本保证。第4题答案.

5.完成艰巨光荣的历史使命，战胜前进道路上的风险挑战，从根本上要靠___，靠党把好方向盘。第5题答案

.6.“万山磅礴必有主峰”。一个国家、一个政党，___至关重要。第6题答案.

5.人民群众是我们党的力量源泉， ___是中国共产党的根本政治立场。

6.把人民对___作为奋斗目标，关键是站稳人民立场。

7.建设中国特色社会主义的伟大实践，从根本上说是广大人民群众自己的实践，群众在实践中 ___的经验，反映了事物发展的客观规律，代表了社会进步的方向。

8.坚持由人民群众评判，把___作为检验工作的第一标准。

9. ___是中国共产党带领人民追求的一个基本目标，也是自古以来我国人民的一个基本理想。

10.实现共同富裕，反映了的___本质特征，体现了坚持以人民为中心的根本立场。

11.必须坚持以人民为中心，在___共享、___共享、共建共享、渐进共享中，不断实现好、维护好、发展好最广大人民的根本利益。、

12.要大力弘扬“___ ”理念，鼓励人民群众艰苦奋斗、勤劳致富、守法经营，通过自身努力创造美好幸福生活。

13.坚定走生产发展、生活富裕、___的文明发展道路，建设人与自然和谐共生的现代化，为人民群众提供更多优质生态产品。

14.要从政治的高度深刻认识密切联系群众的重要性，在全心全意为人民服务中提升政治站位、提高工作能力，在真心实意向人民学习中拓展工作视野、丰富工作经验、提高理论联系实际的水平，在倾听人民呼声、虚心接受人民监督中自觉进行自我反省、自我批评、自我教育，在服务人民中不断完善自己，持之以恒克服 ___，久久为功祛除___ 和___。

18.夺取决胜全面建成小康社会伟大胜利，要坚决打好___、精准扶贫 、污染防治三大攻坚战。

20.全面建成小康社会，标志着我们向着___迈出了至关重要的一步。

21.全面小康社会要求经济持续健康发展，人民民主不断扩大，文化软实力显著增强，人民生活水平全面提高，资源节约型、___社会建设取得重大进展

22.要贯彻绿色发展理念，坚持___、保护优先、自然恢复为主，加快形成节约资源和保护环境的空间格局、产业结构、生产和生活方式。

3.党的十九大提出，我国社会主要矛盾已经由人民日益增长的物质文化需要同落后的社会生产之间的矛盾，转化为人民日益增长的____________和不平衡不充分的发展之间的矛盾。

13.新时代要进行新的伟大实践。要在新时代统揽伟大斗争、伟大工程、_____________、伟大梦想。进行伟大斗争，要充分认识这场斗争的长期性、复杂性、艰巨性，发扬斗争精神，提高斗争本领，敢于斗争，善于斗争，不断夺取新胜利。

14.在中国特色社会主义新时代，我们党面临的“__________________”和“四种危险”仍然是长期的、复杂的、尖锐的、严峻的，全面从严治党永远在路上。

15.党员干部要进一步树立政治意识、大局意识、________________、看齐意识，在政治立场、政治方向、政治原则、政治道路上始终同以习近平同志为核心的党中央保持高度一致，

20.世界正处于大发展大变革大调整时期，我国发展仍处于重要战略机遇期和历史机遇期。当代中国己不再是国际秩序的被动接受者，而是积极的参与者、建设者、___________________。

4.随着互联网特别是移动互联网的发展，社会治理模式正在从单向管理转向___，从线下转向线上线下融合，从单纯的政府监管向更加注重社会协同治理转变。5.理念是行动的先导，创新社会治理首先要___。8.社会治理是一门科学，要运用正确方法论，坚持辩证唯物主义和___。

1.加强和创新社会治理，是完善和发展中国特色社会主义制度、推进国家治理体系和___的重要内容。

9.___是社会主义社会建设的重要目标和特征，全面提高社会文明发展水平是国家发展的需要，是人民的共同期盼。

12.强化预防治本，健全预警应急机制，加大监管执法力度，及时排查化解安全隐患，实行安全生产和重大安全生产事故风险“___”，坚决遏制重特大安全事故频发势头。

14.把社会主义核心价值观融入社会发展各方面，加强社会公德、___、家庭美德、个人品德建设，激励人们向上向善、孝老爱亲，忠于祖国、忠于人民。

15.加强社区治理体系建设，维护社会和谐稳定。社区是党和政府联系、服务居民群众的“___”。

16.加强农村社会治理，主动从源头化解农村社会矛盾，学习推广“___”，争取做到“小事不出村，大事不出镇，矛盾不上交”。

1.全面推进依法治国总目标是建设___ 、建设社会主义法治国家。

2.___是中国特色社会主义最本质的特征，是社会主义法治最根本的保证。

3.坚持中国特色社会主义法治道路的根本目的是___。

4.___是善治的前提。首要的是完善以___为核心的中国特色社会主义法律体系。；

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。

___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___