犯罪嫌疑人张某因涉嫌非法经营罪被甲县公安机关传唤，讯问结束时，负责传唤的警察让其在传唤证上签名、捺指印，然后让其离开。

犯罪嫌疑人甲在公安机关对其进行讯问时，要求自行书写供述，公安机关应当准许。

根据《公安机关办理刑事案件程序规定》的规定，询问证人、被害人，可以到证人、被害人所在单位、住处或者公安机关提出的地点进行。

对与犯罪有关的人身进行检查，只能由侦查人员进行。检查的情况应当写成笔录，由参加检查的人和被检查人签名或者盖章。

被搜查人必须是案件中的犯罪嫌疑人。

搜查妇女的身体，应当由女工作人员或医师进行。搜查的情况应当制作笔录，由侦查人员和被搜查人或者他的家属签名。

侦查人员在侦查过程中，发现与案件有关的犯罪嫌疑人的财物、文件和邮件需要扣押，经办案部门负责人批准后，制作扣押决定书予以扣押。

犯罪嫌疑人李某涉嫌非法经营罪于2月7日被甲地公安机关冻结存款，到期没有续冻。9月6日乙地公安机关发现李某涉嫌非法吸收公众存款，可以将李某的存款再次冻结。

办理刑事案件中冻结债券、股票、基金份额等证券的期限为1年。

犯罪嫌疑人甲的股票被公安机关冻结后，股市大涨，甲可以申请出售被冻结的股票。

公安机关在查处犯罪嫌疑人林某非法经营一案时，欲将其存款账户冻结，结果发现其存款账户已被人民法院冻结，公安机关此时不能再重复冻结，但可以轮候冻结。

对于办理刑事案件中扣押的财物、文件，经查明确实与案件无关的，应当在5日以内解除扣押，退还原主。

在张某故意伤害致人死亡案件中，为确定张某是否为精神病，由鉴定人甲、乙、丙共同进行鉴定。如3人意见不一致，则不同意见都应当在鉴定意见书中注明，且鉴定的时间不计入办案期限。

犯罪嫌疑人甲盗窃笔记本电脑一台，经鉴定该笔记本电脑价值5000元，公安机关应当将该鉴定意见告知犯罪嫌疑人甲，但可以不告知被害人。

在办理刑事案件时，对痕迹鉴定的期间不计入办案期限。

在办理张某故意伤害案件过程中，侦查人员将张某与其他6名无关人员混在一起让目击者甲、乙、丙3人分别进行了辨认。

侦查人员柳某、王某在办理杨某某涉嫌抢劫案件过程中，把杨某某的照片混在10张照片中，组织目击者甲和乙分别进行了辨认。

辨认犯罪嫌疑人时，被辨认的人数不得少于10人。

犯罪嫌疑人在押的案件，除对犯罪嫌疑人作精神病鉴定期间不计入办案期限外，其他鉴定时间都应当计入办案期限。

各级公安机关在自己管辖的地区以内，可以直接发布通缉令；超出自己管辖的地区，应当通知有关公安机关分别发布通缉令。

人民检察院审查案件，对于需要补充侦查的，可以退回公安机关补充侦查，也可以自行侦查。补充侦查以2次为限。

某地公安机关接到人民检察院退回补充侦查李某故意伤害案件后，在补充侦查过程中，发现李某还涉嫌盗窃罪，需要追究刑事责任，应当重新制作起诉意见书，移送人民检察院审查。

人民检察院对于公安机关移送起诉的案件，应当在2个月以内作出决定，重大、复杂的案件，可以延长半个月。补充侦查的期限不计入审查起诉期限。

甲虐待女儿乙的刑事案件，未致使乙重伤的，应当由人民法院直接受理。

甲为了不让女儿乙与丙结婚，将乙长期锁在屋内，并实施打骂，乙不堪忍受，上吊自杀。此案是人民法院直接受理的自诉案件。

某区人民法院直接受理的甲故意伤害（轻伤）案件，因证据不足，移送公安机关侦查，公安机关不应当受理。

被留看守所执行刑罚的罪犯张某因病被暂予监外执行。其在暂予监外执行期间又因琐事伤害他人致人重伤。案件由犯罪地公安机关立案侦查，并通知批准机关。

犯罪嫌疑人甲，女，17周岁，公安机关在对甲进行讯问时，应当通知甲的法定代理人到场，并且应当有女工作人员在场。

人民检察院在对未成年人作出附条件不起诉的决定前，听取公安机关意见时，公安机关应当提出书面意见，经办案部门负责人批准，移送同级人民检察院。

犯罪嫌疑人甲，17周岁，被判处有期徒刑6年，公安机关应当依据生效的判决书，将该未成年人的犯罪记录予以封存。

A市公安局在办理张某涉嫌盗窃案件过程中发现，张某的辩护律师帮助张某隐匿证据，A市公安局应当及时对该案立案侦查并通知辩护律师所属的律师事务所。

甲因为琐事用刀将乙砍成轻伤，甲被刑事拘留后真诚悔罪，向乙进行了赔偿并获得乙的谅解，甲、乙双方自愿达成和解协议。对于本案，公安机关应当向人民检察院提出从宽处理的建议。

甲犯参加恐怖组织罪被公安机关通缉，在通缉令发出1年后甲仍未到案。公安机关认为依照《刑法》规定应当追缴甲的违法所得的，应当作出没收违法所得决定。

甲公安局民警丁某在办理一起诈骗案件中，需要乙公安局扣押与犯罪有关的财物，丁某应当持相关的法律文书、办案协作函件和工作证件至协作地公安机关请求协助执行

美国人约翰在我国境内因为故意伤害罪被依法刑事拘留，办案公安机关应当在24小时内层报省级公安机关，同时通报同级人民政府外事办公室

6502电气集中的选岔网采用_______。[321020201]___

道岔组合、信号组合、_______组合是6502电气集中的三种基本组合类型。[311000000]___

单置调车信号机按钮做变通按钮使用时，_______吸起。[321020201]___

_______不属于敌对进路。[333000000]___

组合架侧面电源与组合架零层_______的配线，采用了环接电源的方法。[322030203]___

是 ___

在客观规律面前，人的主观能动性表现在___

事物的联系和运动之间的关系___

唯物辩证法的总特征是___

___

“割下来的手就不再是人手”这句话体现了___

唯物辩证法认为发展的实质是___

区分新事物和旧事物的标志在于看它们___

质量互变规律揭示了___

质和事物的存在是___

在实际工作中，要注意掌握分寸，防止“过”或“不及”，其关键在于___

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?___