3 展台与卤钨灯等高温照明灯具贴邻部位的材料应采用___级装修材料。

    2 厨房内的固定橱柜宜采用___级的装修材料。

    3 卫生间顶棚宜采用___级装修材料。

    4 阳台装修宜采用___级的装修材料。

4．0．16 照明灯具及电气设备、线路的高温部位，当靠近___级装修材料或构件时，应采取隔热、散热等防火保护措施，与窗帘、帷幕、幕布、软包等装修材料的距离不应小于___；灯饰应采用不低于___级的材料。

4．0．17 建筑内部的配电箱、控制面板、接线盒、开关、插座等不应直接安装在低于___级的装修材料上；用于顶棚和墙面装修的木质类板材，当内部含有电器、电线等物体时，应采用不低于___级的材料。

4．0．18 当室内顶棚、墙面、地面和隔断装修材料内部安装电加热供暖系统时，室内采用的装修材料和绝热材料的燃烧性能等级应为___级。当室内顶棚、墙面、地面和隔断装修材料内部安装水暖___供暖系统时，其顶棚采用的装修材料和绝热材料的燃烧性能应为___级，其他部位的装修材料和绝热材料的燃烧性能不应低于___级，且尚应符合本规范有关公共场所的规定。

4．0．19 建筑内部不宜设置采用___级装饰材料制成的壁挂、布艺等，当需要设置时，不应靠近电气线路、火源或热源，或采取隔离措施。

1

根据《金融许可证管理办法》规定，银监会或其派出机构根据行政许可决定需向金融机构颁发、换发金融许可证的，应当自作出行政许可决定之日起_______日内向申请人颁发、换发金融许可证。___

《金融许可证管理办法》是为了加强金融机构的_______，促进金融机构依法经营，制定本办法。___

根据《金融许可证管理办法》规定，银监会或其派出机构根据行政许可决定需向金融机构颁发、换发金融许可证的，应当自作出行政许可决定之日起_______日内向申请人颁发、换发金融许可证。___

《金融许可证管理办法》是为了加强金融机构的_______，促进金融机构依法经营，制定本办法。___

1

根据《金融许可证管理办法》规定，银监会或其派出机构根据行政许可决定需向金融机构颁发、换发金融许可证的，应当自作出行政许可决定之日起_______日内向申请人颁发、换发金融许可证。___

《金融许可证管理办法》是为了加强金融机构的_______，促进金融机构依法经营，制定本办法。___

根据《金融许可证管理办法》规定，金融许可证实行机构编码_______原则。金融机构除发生更名、营业地址变更、被撤销等原因外，机构编码一旦确定不再改变。___

某民营银行经申请取得在福州路来福小区开办社区银行的许可证，但经过认真测算，该银行认为该社区支行三年内将无法盈利正犹豫是否开业。某小贷公司法定代表人戴某获悉这一消息。主动上门协商由其按年30万元的标准向该银行支付许可证租赁费，由其自行招募员工，自行经营，自负盈亏。根据《金融许可证管理办法》规定，该银行的行为违反了______的规定。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，监管机构发出任职资格核准文件_______后，未实际到任履行相应职责，且未向监管机构提供正当理由的，已拥有任职资格的拟任、现任董事（理事）和高级管理人员的任职资格失效。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，金融机构董事长（理事长）、行长（总经理、主任）及分支机构行长（总经理、主任）缺位时，金融机构应当根据公司章程等规定指定相关人员代为履职，并在指定之后_______内向监管机构报告。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，该办法中所称金融机构拟任、现任董事（理事）和高级管理人员的近亲属，不包括下列的_______。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，已连续中断任职_______以上的，拟任职所在地银监会派出机构应当书面通知拟任人所在金融机构重新申请任职资格。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，金融机构拟任、现任董事（理事）和高级管理人员本人及其所控股的股东单位合并持有该金融机构______以上股份，且从该金融机构获得的授信总额明显超过其持有的该金融机构股权净值的情况，视为不符合个人及家庭财务稳健及具有担任金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员职务所需独立性的任职资格条件。___

1

根据《金融许可证管理办法》规定，银监会或其派出机构根据行政许可决定需向金融机构颁发、换发金融许可证的，应当自作出行政许可决定之日起_______日内向申请人颁发、换发金融许可证。___

《金融许可证管理办法》是为了加强金融机构的_______，促进金融机构依法经营，制定本办法。___

根据《金融许可证管理办法》规定，金融许可证实行机构编码_______原则。金融机构除发生更名、营业地址变更、被撤销等原因外，机构编码一旦确定不再改变。___

某民营银行经申请取得在福州路来福小区开办社区银行的许可证，但经过认真测算，该银行认为该社区支行三年内将无法盈利正犹豫是否开业。某小贷公司法定代表人戴某获悉这一消息。主动上门协商由其按年30万元的标准向该银行支付许可证租赁费，由其自行招募员工，自行经营，自负盈亏。根据《金融许可证管理办法》规定，该银行的行为违反了______的规定。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，监管机构发出任职资格核准文件_______后，未实际到任履行相应职责，且未向监管机构提供正当理由的，已拥有任职资格的拟任、现任董事（理事）和高级管理人员的任职资格失效。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，金融机构董事长（理事长）、行长（总经理、主任）及分支机构行长（总经理、主任）缺位时，金融机构应当根据公司章程等规定指定相关人员代为履职，并在指定之后_______内向监管机构报告。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，该办法中所称金融机构拟任、现任董事（理事）和高级管理人员的近亲属，不包括下列的_______。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，已连续中断任职_______以上的，拟任职所在地银监会派出机构应当书面通知拟任人所在金融机构重新申请任职资格。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，金融机构拟任、现任董事（理事）和高级管理人员本人及其所控股的股东单位合并持有该金融机构______以上股份，且从该金融机构获得的授信总额明显超过其持有的该金融机构股权净值的情况，视为不符合个人及家庭财务稳健及具有担任金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员职务所需独立性的任职资格条件。___

根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》规定，金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员应当在_______获得任职资格核准。___

泰山银行（城商行）拟聘吕某任平潭支行行长。根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》，下列表述_____是正确的。___

某股份制银行拟将郭某从上海分行副行长任上调往福州分行任行长。根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》，下面有关其离任审计报告说法正确的是______。___

王某从业多年，业绩优秀，所在商业银行拟提拔其为分管公司业务的副行长。根据《银行业金融机构董事（理事）和高级管理人员任职资格管理办法》，以下不属于对王某任职考核因素的是_____ 。___

根据《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，民营企业参与城市商业银行风险处置的，持股比例可以适当放宽至_____以上。___

根据《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，通过并购重组方式参与农村信用社和农村商业银行风险处置的，允许单个企业及其关联方阶段性持股比例超过_____。___

根据《中国银监会关于鼓励和引导民间资本进入银行业的实施意见》规定，引导银行业金融机构建立小型微型企业金融服务长效机制，贯彻落实小型微型企业金融服务________

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___

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.