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?___

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___。

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于加强银行业客户投诉处理工作的通知》规定，银行业金融机构应将本单位投诉处理程序及相关规定报银监会备案，并于_______向银监会书面报告相关机制运行情况。___

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于加强银行业客户投诉处理工作的通知》规定，银行业金融机构应通过定期检查回顾不断完善其投诉处理机制，定期检查回顾工作要由_______进行，以保证检查回顾的公正和有效。___

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于加强银行业客户投诉处理工作的通知》规定，银行业金融机构应及时对客户投诉作出回应并展开调查，按照业务的复杂程度在不同时限要求内妥善解决并最终给予答复，不能按预定时间处理完毕的，_______。___

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于加强银行业客户投诉处理工作的通知》规定，银行业金融机构应明确本行客户投诉处理的_______，并确保负责投诉处理的部门和人员与被投诉事件的相对独立性，___

按照《中国银监会关于完善银行业金融机构客户投诉处理机制切实做好金融消费者保护工作的通知》规定，银行业金融机构_______应当将关注和维护金融消费者的合法权益作为重要职责之一。___

按照《中国银监会关于完善银行业金融机构客户投诉处理机制切实做好金融消费者保护工作的通知》规定，投诉处理应当高效快速。处理时限原则上不得超过_______个工作日。___

按照《中国银监会关于完善银行业金融机构客户投诉处理机制切实做好金融消费者保护工作的通知》规定，情况复杂或有特殊原因的，可以适当延长处理时限，但最长不得超过_______个工作日，并应当以短信、邮件、信函等方式告知客户延长时限及理由。___

按照《中国银监会关于完善银行业金融机构客户投诉处理机制切实做好金融消费者保护工作的通知》规定，银行业金融机构及其各级分支机构应当做好金融消费者投诉统计、分析工作，并形成_______报告报送银监会或其派出机构。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》规定，银行业金融机构应该坚持_______，合理安排柜面窗口，缩减等候时间，不得无故拒绝银行业消费者合理的服务需求。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》规定，银行业金融机构在产品销售的过程中，严格区分_______和_______，不得混淆、模糊两者性质向银行业消费者误导推销金融产品。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》规定，_______承担银行业消费者权益保护工作的最终责任。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》（银监发〔2013〕38号）规定，除国家有权机关依法查询、冻结和扣划外，银行应拒绝其他任何单位和个人的查询、冻结和扣划，这是银行消费者拥有_______的体现。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》（银监发〔2013〕38号）规定，银行消费者在消费中享有知悉其购买、使用产品或接受服务的真实情况的权利，如：利率、手续费标准等等，这是消费者拥有_______的体现。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》（银监发〔2013〕38号）规定，银行业消费者是指_______。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》（银监发〔2013〕38号）规定，_______是实施银行业消费者权益保护的工作主体。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》（银监发〔2013〕38号）规定，以下_______说法是错误的。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》（银监发〔2013〕38号）规定，，以下_______做法是错误的。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》（银监发〔2013〕38号）规定，银行业金融机构应当设立或指定专门部门负责银行业消费者权益保护工作，以下关于银行业消费者权益保护职能部门的表述，_______是错误的。___

依据《中国银监会关于印发银行业消费者权益保护工作指引的通知》（银监发〔2013〕38号）规定，消费者权益保护的工作原则不包括以下_______。___

依据《中国银监会办公厅关于做好特殊消费者群体金融服务工作的通知》规定，银行业金融机构必须树立以_______为中心的服务理念。___

依据《中国银监会办公厅关于做好特殊消费者群体金融服务工作的通知》（银监办发〔2013〕289号）规定，以下_______说法是错误的。___

依据《中国银监会办公厅关于做好特殊消费者群体金融服务工作的通知》（银监办发〔2013〕289号）规定，以下_______说法是错误的。___

按照《最高人民法院关于审理存单纠纷案件的若干规定》规定，人民法院在审理一般存单纠纷案件中，除应审查存单、进账单、对账单、存款合同等凭证的真实性外，还应审查持有人与金融机构间存款关系的真实性，并以存单、进账单、对账单、存款合同等凭证的真实性以及存款关系的真实性为依据，作出正确处理。持有人以上述真实凭证为证据提起诉讼的，_____应当对持有人与金融机构间是否存在存款关系负举证责任。___

按照《最高人民法院关于审理存单纠纷案件的若干规定》规定，案件当事人因伪造、变造、虚开存单或涉嫌诈骗，有关国家机关已立案侦查，存单纠纷案件确须待刑事案件结案后才能审理的，人民法院应当 审理。___

按照《最高人民法院关于审理存单纠纷案件的若干规定》规定，出资人起诉金融机构的，人民法院应通知用资人作为_____参加诉讼。___

A将D万元存到银行，银行出具存单或进账单。A再指定银行将资金转给B，后B只偿还给A20万元。根据《最高人民法院关于审理存单纠纷案件的若干规定》的规定，下列 说法是正确的？___

按照《最高人民法院关于审理票据纠纷案件若干问题的规定》规定，人民法院决定受理公示催告申请，应当同时通知付款人及代理付款人停止支付，并自立案之日起三日内发出公告。___

甲公司为购买货物而将所持有的汇票背书转让给乙公司，但因担心以此方式付款后对方不交货，因此在背书栏中记载了“乙公司必须按期保质交货，否则不付款”的字样。乙公司在收到票据后没有按期交货。根据《最高人民法院关于审理票据纠纷案件若干问题的规定》的规定，下列表述中是_____正确的。___

按照《最高人民法院关于审理信用证纠纷案件若干问题的规定》规定，开证行有_______审查单据的权利和义务。___

按照《最高人民法院关于审理信用证纠纷案件若干问题的规定》规定，人民法院接受中止支付信用证项下款项申请后，必须在_______小时内作出裁定。___

按照《最高人民法院关于审理信用证纠纷案件若干问题的规定》，开证申请人与开证行对信用证进行修改未征得保证人同意的，下列关于保证人保证责任期间和范围说法错误的是_______。___

按照《最高人民法院关于审理信用证纠纷案件若干问题的规定》规定，当事人对人民法院作出中止支付信用证项下款项的裁定有异议的，可以在裁定书送达之日起_______日内向上一级人民法院申请复议。___

2010年初，甲国A公司（卖方）与中国Y公司（买方）订立货物买卖合同。Y公司向国内某银行申请开出了不可撤销信用证。在合同履行过程中，Y公司派驻甲国的业务人员发现该批货物很可能与合同严重不符且没有价值，于是Y公司随即向有管辖权的中国法院提出申请，要求裁定止付信用证项下的款项。依照2005年《最高人民法院关于审理信用证纠纷案件若干问题的规定》，下列哪一表述是错误的______ ___

A公司向银行申请开立D万美元的信用证，由B公司提供保证担保，之后未经B公司同意，银行和A公司协商将信用证金额修改为120万美元，根据《最高人民法院关于审理信用证纠纷案件若干问题的规定》（法释【2005】13号）规定，B公司应如何承担担保责任_________

按照《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国担保法〉若干问题的解释》规定，保证合同约定的保证期间早于或者等于主债务履行期限的，视为没有约定，保证期间为主债务履行期届满之日起______。___

按照《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国担保法〉若干问题的解释》规定，最高额抵押合同，抵押权人实现最高额抵押权时，如果实际发生的债权余额高于最高限额的______。___

按照《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国担保法〉若干问题的解释》规定，质押合同中对质押的财产约定不明，或者约定的出质财产与实际移交的财产不一致的， ______。___

按照《最高人民法院关于适用〈中华人民共和国担保法〉若干问题的解释》规定，主合同有效而担保合同无效，债权人、担保人有过错的，担保人承担民事责任的部分，不应超过债务人不能清偿部分的______。___

张三作为债务人向李四银行借款D万元，并由王五提供一般保证担保。后来张三欠款不还，李四银行找到王五，王五认为自己是一般保证的保证人，在主合同纠纷未经审判或者仲裁，并就债务人财产依法强制执行仍不能履行债务前，对债权人可以拒绝承担保证责任。依据《担保法解释》规定，出现下列何种情形时，王五不得行使上述先诉抗辩权______ ___

甲企业与乙银行签订借款合同，借款金额为C万元人民币，由丙企业作为借款保证人。合同签订3个月后，甲企业与乙银行协商，将贷款金额减少到500万元，但未通知丙企业。后甲企业到期不能偿还债务。依据《担保法解释》规定，该案中的保证责任应如何承担______ ___