根据《人身保险业务档案管理规范》第5条规定：人身保险公司对自身的业务档案采取自行管理方式的，应集中到省级公司统一管理

根据《人身保险业务档案管理规范》第9条规定：销毁档案时，必须有两人监销

根据《人身保险业务基本服务规定》第16条规定：保险公司与保险销售人员解除劳动合同或者委托合同，通过该保险销售人员签订的一年期以上的人身保险合同尚未履行完毕的，保险公司应当告知投保人保单状况以及获得后续服务的途径

根据《人身保险业务基本服务规定》第23条规定：保险公司在收到被保险人或者受益人的赔偿或者给付保险金的请求后，应当在5个工作日内作出核定；情形复杂的，应当在30日内作出核定，但合同另有约定的除外

根据《人身保险业务基本服务规定》第21条规定：对于约定分期支付保险费的保险合同，保险公司应当向投保人确认是否需要缴费提示

根据《保险公司中介业务违法行为处罚办法》第7条规定：保险公司应当设置专门岗位，负责对保险代理业务进行日常管理，并且建立代理业务合规经营档案

根据《保险公司中介业务违法行为处罚办法》第4条规定：保险公司应当逐单记载通过保险代理人、保险经纪人签订的保单的保险费和佣金数额

《保险公司中介业务违法行为处罚办法》第8条规定：保险公司应当及时要求保险代理人纠正保险违法行为，保险代理人拒不纠正的，保险公司应当终止其代理权

根据《保险业反洗钱工作管理办法》第2条规定：中国保险监督管理委员会根据有关法律法规和国务院授权，履行保险业反洗钱监管职责

根据《保险业反洗钱工作管理办法》第22条规定：保险公司通过保险专业代理公司、金融机构类保险兼业代理机构开展保险业务时，应当在合作协议中写入反洗钱条款

根据《保险业反洗钱工作管理办法》第20条规定：保险公司、保险资产管理公司破产和解散时，应当将客户身份资料和交易记录移交国务院有关部门指定的机构

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》第1条规定：保险公司批单和批注不得改变条款中规定的保险责任和保险期间

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》第2条规定：保险公司可以授权保险销售人员个人设计、变更业务宣传材料

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》第6条规定：保单贷款期限一般不超过一年

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》第6条规定：保险公司不得向投保人以外的第三方提供保单贷款

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》第6条规定：以死亡为给付保险金条件的合同所签发的保单贷款，应当事先经被保险人书面同意

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》第6条规定：保单贷款金额不得超过保单现金价值

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》保险公司可以授权保险销售人员个人设计、变更业务宣传材料

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》第5条规定：保险公司向代理人支付佣金应充分考虑代理人对投保人的服务品质，应通过对首期佣金水平、续期佣金水平以及支付期限的合理调节，提升代理人在保单存续期间对投保人的服务水平

根据《关于规范人身保险业务经营有关问题的通知》第3条规定：在承保年金保险业务时，保险公司可以对同一保单采用趸缴趸领的方式承保

根据《保险公司养老保险业务管理办法》第十一条规定：养老保险公司经营企业年金管理业务，可以在全国展业

根据《保险公司养老保险业务管理办法》第十九条规定：团体养老年金保险合同应对约定被保险人在离职时，有权直接向保险公司申请提取该被保险人全部或者部分已归属权益

根据《保险公司养老保险业务管理办法》第二十条规定：团体养老年金保险合同设置公共账户的，被保险人缴费部分的权益可以计入公共账户

根据《保险公司养老保险业务管理办法》第二十六条规定：对同一投保团体在不同省、自治区、直辖市的成员，保险公司可以统一承保团体养老年金保险

根据《保险公司养老保险业务管理办法》第二十九条规定：保险公司销售团体养老年金保险合同，应当向每个被保险人签发保险凭证

根据《保险公司养老保险业务管理办法》第三十五条规定：保险公司经营养老保险业务按照中央和地方政府的有关政策享受税收优惠

根据《保险公司养老保险业务管理办法》第三十六条规定：企业年金基金的委托人，仅指设立企业年金的企业，不包括其职工

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第二条规定：本办法所称保险销售从业人员是指为保险公司销售保险产品的人员，仅指保险公司的保险销售人员

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第十一条规定：降低学历要求取得资格证书的保险从业人员，展业地域范围无特殊规定

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第十六条规定：对持有资格证书及执业证书的人员，保险公司、保险代理机构可委托其从事保险销售

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第二十一条规定：保险公司、保险代理机构可以委托行业组织或者其他机构组织培训

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第二十二条规定：保险公司、保险代理机构不得发布有关保险销售从业人员收入或者其他利益的误导性广告，不得以购买保险产品作为发放执业证书的条件

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第二十七条规定：任何机构、个人不得扣留或者变相扣留他人的资格证书

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第二十一条规定：保险公司、保险代理机构可以委托行业组织或者其他机构组织培训

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第十一条规定判断：降低学历要求取得资格证书的保险从业人员，展业地域范围无特殊规定

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第十六条规定判断：只要持有保险销售从业人员资格证书，保险公司、保险代理机构就可以委托其从事保险销售

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第四条规定：保险销售从业人员应当符合中国保监会规定的资格条件，取得中国保监会颁发的资格证书，执业前取得所在保险公司、保险代理机构发放的执业证书

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第十七条规定：执业证书持有人的执业地域不得超出资格证书规定的从业地域范围

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第十九条规定：保险销售从业人员可以在保险公司、保险代理机构的授权范围外从事保险销售

根据《保险销售从业人员监管办法》第十九条规定： 保险销售从业人员从事保险销售，应当出示执业证书，保险代理机构的保险销售从业人员还应当告知客户所代理的保险公司名称

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___

判别什么样的人生才有意义___