预留印鉴卡资料须按规定的项目填写，内容准确、完整。其中：签章式样、账户名称、账号、启用日期为不可更改要素，其他要素在预留时需要更改的，必须由营业机构经办人员在更改处签章，经换人审核并签章确认。

预留印章时必须使用朱红印油，印鉴的字迹和轮廓要圆润清晰、印油均匀、没有断笔。图章轮廓以内和附近没有与印鉴内容无关的干扰或杂质。不得使用原子印章预留印鉴，其签章为篆体字的，不予受理。

办理新印鉴预留手续时，存款人在新印鉴卡背面加盖旧印鉴及新公章后，由经办柜员在新印鉴卡正面注明启用日期。印鉴启用日期为印鉴变更手续完成后的次日，特殊情况需在当日启用的，应由客户出具加盖公章的公函说明，原印鉴注销日期为新印鉴启用日期。

撤销一般存款账户，销户后账户资金转账划入法定代表人账户。

核准类账户撤销，柜员在审核相关资料无误后，在核心系统中办理销户，并在2个工作日内，将销户手续报送至当地人行。

基本存款账户“转户”，是指存款人因迁址或其他需要，在原基本存款账户开户银行撤销基本存款账户后，选择其他银行，申请重新开立基本存款账户的行为。

账户销户前需先将支票核销，支票核销需要当面加盖作废或剪角处理.作附件上附时，需要截角+附件章或作废章+附件章。

账户属性为“正常、普通存款、财政存款、政府背景、休眠--正常、无人申领--正常”时，销户时需要去做删除。

账户结清后仅允许将款项一次性划出，不允许发生其他金融交易。

当日结清允许冲账.

客户存在未结清事项的，不能办理销户手续。

办理销户时，需验证客户交回的印鉴卡是否真实，与本行留存的印鉴卡、验印系统的印章记录、编号是否相符；开户许可证是否原人行核发的许可证.

当日结清允许冲账，不支持结清的隔日冲账。结清后可以隔日销户，但结清日至销户日之间不再计算利息。

基本账户销户前，需要处理他行久悬账户

一般账户结清余额必须划入同名基本账户。

对于一般帐户，如果其基本帐户已经销户，无法转入其基本帐户的，需要支取现金的，需要客户提供基本帐户已销的相关证明文件。

支票核销只能按凭证种类分别核销，若你核销的凭证既有现金支票，又有转账支票，需要在这个交易里做两次。若同类凭证有分段号码的，则可以分别添加在同一个交易里实现。

经办柜员在综合业务系统中使用“2408结清”交易进行销户计息处理。

久悬激活后进行的结清，需要对前笔利息进行手工回单补制。

非核准类账户的撤销，开户行审批后直接办理销户手续，并在账户管理系统中撤销该账户。

如客户有代扣关系或有借款记录的，需要对帐户在代扣关系模块中进行关系删除或先行贷款归还。只有确认已无签约记录或贷款尚款归还，但属性还存在，无法销户时，才能使用“2402对公账户信息维护”把人工把这个属性删除。

长期不动户的单位存款人办理销户手续时，应将印鉴卡从长期不动户印鉴卡册中抽出，加盖“已注销”戳记，注明注销日期，批注“账户销户”字样。注销的印鉴卡与销户资料一并放入销户当日传票上缴复核中心。

关于农民工工资专户账户的销户，需在工程完工后，凭属地主管部门的《关于撤销工程农民工工资专用账户的函》和我行相关账户管理制度的销户资料所需要资料办理销户，如销户文件不齐全的，不予办理销户。

新开企业如账户资料不完整、不合规或者账户管理系统录入信息错漏的，开户行应自收到中国人民银行核查通知之日起3个工作日内更正。无法按规定更正的，开户行应当在3个工作日内对相关账户采取止付。

账户资料的借阅应登记会计档案查阅登记簿，账户资料未经会计主管和分管行长审批同意不得借阅、复印，经审批可以借阅、复印的，应在会计档案查阅登记簿上记录。

开户行发现账户资料丢失的，应立即追查原因，直接联系客户补办账户资料。开户行补制的账户资料应真实、正确。

开户行发现账户资料丢失的，应立即追查原因，并报告上级主管部门。

账户资料采取纸质、影印件留存。

每日开户、变更、注销的纸质资料放于柜员传票做附件上交事后监督中心。

柜面智能电子化系统试运行上线后，1906柜员轧账传票摆放顺序为：总轧账单－非无纸化轧账单－重空轧账单－非无纸化柜员凭证和附件资料（包括有操作无流水）－无纸化轧账单－无纸化附件资料，传票编号从1、2、3……顺序编制。

十五、活期保证金结息后，利息自动入活期存款账户内。

单位活期存款账户计息期间遇到利率调整分段计息。

现金存款不支持隔日冲账，如串户等原因要求的隔日冲账只能通过2406转账进行调整。

被冻结的款项，不属于赃款的，冻结期应计付利息，在扣划时利息应付给债权单位，属于赃款的，冻结期间不计付利息。

对单位的存款利息可以转账或者现金支付，所计利息应于结息当日入账。

保证金活期帐户的结息入帐帐户是保证金帐户本身。

单位活期存款按日计提，按季自动结息，也可以进行单户临时结息，计息期间遇到利率调整分段计息，每季末二十日为结息日。计算公式为：利息=累计计息积数×日利率。

被冻结的款项，不属于赃款的，冻结期应计付利息，在扣划时利息应付给债权单位，属于赃款的，冻结期间不计付利息。

单位活期存款按月计提，按季自动结息，也可以进行单户临时结息，计息期间遇到利率调整分段计息，每季末二十日为结息日。

单位活期存款是一种随时可以存取、按月计息的存款，其存取主要通过现金或转账办理。

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___

为调整和规范人类社会生活三大领域，相应分别形成了___