2：首套住房贷款利息的扣除标准是全国统一的。

3： 纳税人赡养2个及以上老人的，不按老人人数加倍扣除。

4：纳税人的子女年满3周岁但未上幼儿园，则不能享受子女教育专项附加扣除政策。

1：对以开立账户形式新建立业务关系的客户，网点柜员应于业务关系建立后的___个工作日内，根据客户的基本信息中有关“国籍”、“行业”、“职业”等重要信息和其他资料信息，完成客户洗钱风险等级划分工作，并在反洗钱系统中选定该客户的风险等级标识。

2：营业网点柜员在对经分析认定为高风险等级的个人及单位客户，应在高风险客户的账户开立___个工作日内完整填写《高风险个人客户认定表》或《高风险单位客户认定表》经支行主管会计初审和支行行长复核后，交总行反洗钱牵头管理部门负责人批准。

3：有卡折代理存现1万元(含)以上的，我行要求从2020年___月起，以联网核查为主的方式核对、登记客户身份证件或其他身份证明文件并留存复印件、登记客户联系方式。

4：若被收缴人对被收缴货币的真伪有异议，可向鉴定单位提出鉴定申请。下面关于申请鉴定的陈述，错误的是：___

5：有权机关直接到各支行进行查询、冻结、扣划时，有权机关查询、冻结、扣划完成后，支行于___日内向反洗钱牵头管理部门提交( )，经反洗钱牵头管理部门负责人批准后，在反洗钱系统内将该客户等级调为高风险。

6：当日单笔或者累计人民币交易___万元以上(含)、外币等值()万美元以上(含)的现金缴存、现金支取、现金结售汇、现钞兑换、现金汇款、现金票据解付及其他形式的现金收支，应当通过反洗钱系统提交大额交易报告。

7：自然人客户银行账户与其他的银行账户之间发生当日单笔或者累计交易人民币___万元以上(含)、外币等值()万美元以上(含)的境内款项划转，应当通过反洗钱系统提交大额交易报告。

8：本行各营业机构在以开立账户等方式与客户建立业务关系或客户为他人提供交易金额单笔人民币___万元以上或外币等值()美元以上的现金汇款(含无卡、无折存现业务)、现钞兑换、票据兑付等一次性金融服务时，应通过以联网核查为主的方式核对、登记客户身份证件或其他身份证明文件并留存复印件、登记客户联系方式。

9：客户先前提交的身份证件或身份证明文件已过有效期的，本行各开户机构应及时联系客户___内提供新的身份证明文件，留存复印件后专夹保管，并在综合前端系统进行身份证明文件资料更新。

10：下列关于金融机构现金清分中心发现假币的收缴程序和要求，陈述错误的是：___

11：非自然人客户银行账户与其他的银行账户发生当日单笔或者累计交易人民币___万元以上(含)、外币等值()万美元以上(含)的款项划转，应当通过反洗钱系统提交大额交易报告。

12：自然人客户银行账户与其他的银行账户之间发生当日单笔或者累计交易人民币___万元以上(含)、外币等值()万美元以上(含)的跨境款项划转，应当通过反洗钱系统提交大额交易报告。

13：各支行成立反洗钱工作实施小组，由支行行长任组长、主管会计任副组长、各网点负责人为小组成员。指定各支行___为各支行的反洗钱管理员，指定( )为各营业网点的反洗钱工作人员。

14：反洗钱系统中，当可疑案例被排除后，自动进入案例处理模块中的___子选项卡界面，方便再次出现可疑时直接编辑上报。

15：各支行需调整风险等级的客户，若其归属网点在本行其他营业网点，则受理查冻扣业务的网点应于当日在反洗钱系统中添加风险事件，并于___个工作日内向反洗钱牵头管理部门递交风险等级调整申请表。

16：取消企业银行账户许可的不包括下列___

17：《企业银行结算账户管理办法》所称银行结算账户不包括___?

18：企业在取消银行账户许可前开立的基本存款账户、临时存款账户___正常使用?

19：取消企业银行账户许可后，企业是否可以多开几个基本存款账户?___

20：企业真实性审核通过后，是否即可为企业开立基本存款账户?___

21：银行如何审核企业基本存款账户的唯一性___

22：企业开户时，提供营业执照时下列哪项不能认可___

23：对核实开户意愿的视频、音频等工作记录是否需要保存___

24：取消企业银行账户许可后，企业在银行申请开立存款账户，多久可以使用?___

25：6月15日，客户在取消企业银行账户许可前取得的基本存款账户开户许可证丢失了，如何处理?___

26：未成年人的法定监护人：首先应当由其___担任，如父母死亡或者无监护能力的，由其他有监护能力的人按顺序担任监护人。

27：1090交易，当年错账冲正用___字，隔年错账冲正只能用反方向___字补帐。___

28：代发错误时，应与代发单位和账户所有人协商采取适当的方式进行处理，未签署代发/代扣协议或代发/代扣协议不符合要求的，不能通过___交易进行代扣处理。

29：开户次日起6个月未发生业务的账户进行非柜面渠道业务发生控制, 解控的交易码为___。

30：以下哪种凭证不得作为质押的权利凭证___

1：存款保险条例自___起施行。

2：为了建立和规范存款保险制度，依法保护___的合法权益，及时防范和化解金融风险，维护金融稳定，制定本条例。

3：为了建立和规范存款保险制度，依法保护存款人的合法权益，及时防范和化解金融风险，维护___，制定本条例。

4：存款保险条例中的投保机构是指___

5：存款保险条例所称存款保险，是指___向存款保险基金管理机构交纳保费，形成存款保险基金，存款保险基金管理机构依照本条例的规定向存款人偿付被保险存款，并采取必要措施维护存款以及存款保险基金安全的制度。

6：被保险存款包括投保机构吸收的___。但是，金融机构同业存款、投保机构的高级管理人员在本投保机构的存款以及存款保险基金管理机构规定不予保险的其他存款除外。

7：存款保险条例中，被保险存款包括投保机构吸收的人民币存款和外币存款。但是___除外。

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___

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___