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?___

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?___

按照《中国银监会关于规范商业银行理财业务投资运作有关问题的通知》规定，商业银行须经总行审核批准后，才可以为非标准化债权资产或股权性资产融资提供直接或间接、显性或隐性的担保或回购承诺

按照《中国银监会 中国人民银行 发改委关于银行业金融机构免除部分服务收费的通知》规定，2011年7月1日起，银行业金融机构不得收取已签约开立的代发工资账户、退休金账户、低保账户、医保账户、失业保险账户、住房公积金账户的年费和账户管理费（不含小额账户管理费）

按照《中国银监会 中国人民银行 发改委关于银行业金融机构免除部分服务收费的通知》规定，银行业金融机构代理国家有关部门或者其他机构的收费，应在办理业务前，明确告知客户，尊重客户对相关服务的自主选择权

甲于2013年12月1日前往银行卡开户行打印纸质对账单，根据《中国银监会、中国人民银行、发改委关于银行业金融机构免除部分服务收费的通知》银行要求收取打印对账单的相关手续费

根据《中国银监会、中国人民银行、发改委关于银行业金融机构免除部分服务收费的通知》甲的银行卡开户银行未经甲以书面、客户服务中心电话录音或电子签名方式单独授权，不得对甲强制收取短信服务费

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》规定，商业银行开展保理业务可将应收账款的催收、管理等业务外包给第三方机构

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》规定，.商业银行在受理保理融资业务时，对因提供服务、承接工程或其他非销售商品原因所产生的应收账款，可适当放宽审查交易背景真实性和定价的合理性

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》（中国银监会令〔2014〕5号）规定，保理业务是以债务人转让其应付账款为前提，集应付账款催收、管理、坏账担保及融资于一体的综合性金融服务

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》（中国银监会令〔2014〕5号）规定，应收账款是指企业因提供商品、服务或者出租资产而形成的金钱债权及其产生的收益，包括因票据或其他有价证券而产生的付款请求权

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》（中国银监会令〔2014〕5号）规定，买卖双方保理机构为同一银行不同分支机构的，原则上可视作双保理

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》（中国银监会令〔2014〕5号）规定，应收账款的转让，是指与应收账款相关的部分或全部权利及权益的让渡

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》（中国银监会令〔2014〕5号）规定，商业银行开展保理业务时，可将应收账款的催收、管理等业务外包给经准入的第三方机构

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》（中国银监会令〔2014〕5号）规定，当发生买方信用风险，保理银行履行垫付款义务后，应当将垫款计入表内，列为不良贷款进行管理

按照《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》（中国银监会令〔2014〕5号）规定，以应收账款为质押的贷款，属于保理业务范围

A公司以其持有的对B公司的应收账款向甲银行进行质押，并获得贷款，依据《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》规定，应当属于甲银行保理业务的范围

甲银行拟开展双保理业务，依据《商业银行保理业务管理暂行办法》规定，对于买方保理机构为非银行机构的，甲银行应当拒绝叙做

按照《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》要求，商业银行可以使用银行内部账户以清算资金的名义为第三方支付机构存放客户备付金

按照《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》要求，不具备双（多）因素认证条件的客户，其任何账户不得与第三方支付机构建立业务关联

按照《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》要求，不具备即时通知条件的客户，可通过银行与第三方支付机构建立一次签约、多次支付的业务合作关系

按照《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》要求，商业银行接受客户申请，通过身份验证后，应当提供可以撤销客户账户与第三方支付机构业务合作关联的服务

按照《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，商业银行与第三方支付单位首次建立业务关联时应经双重认证

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，客户银行账户与第三方支付机构首次建立业务关联时，如具备条件，应经双重认证，即客户在通过第三方支付机构认证的同时，还需经过商业银行的客户身份鉴别

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，对开通短信或其他方式即时通知功能的客户，应就每一笔支付交易即时通知客户，通知信息中包含但不限于第三方支付机构名称、交易金额、交易时间等

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，商业银行与第三方支付机构合作开展各项业务，对涉及到的客户所有信息管理，均应严格遵循有关法律法规和监管制度规定

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，商业银行应对客户的技术风险承受能力进行评估

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，商业银行通过电子渠道验证和辨别客户身份，对不具备双（多）种因素认证条件的客户，其任何账户不得与第三方支付机构建立业务关联

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，商业银行对账户与第三方支付机构建立业务关联的客户，应开通至少一种账户变动即时通知技术，暂时不具备即时通知条件的客户，也可以通过银行与第三方支付机构建立一次签约、多次支付的业务合作关系

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，商业银行不得向客户提供临时调整支付限额服务

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，商业银行应对客户通过第三方支付机构进行大额资金划转强化身份认证，确保由客户本人发出资金划转要求

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，如果银行已按要求在业务关联时通过相关信息验证以确保客户身份真实可靠，在交易时可以无需再次验证

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，从银行账户划出的支付交易资金，遇到交易终止、失败应划回原银行账户

按照《关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，商业银行应做好数据和操作指令的整理和日志备份，便于事后检查和审计

某国有控股银行的一家省级分行，为积极拓展负债业务，提升负债业务的市场份额，以获取更加优异的内部考核，在未告知总行并向兄弟分行保密的情况，与当地的一家大型第三方支付机构合作开展了备付金存管业务，以此获得15亿元的资金沉淀，在当地的负债业务市场份额占比中提升了2个百分比，在总行考核中提升了5个百分比。根据《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》规定，该省级分行秘密与第三方支付机构开展备付金存管业务是可行的

某客户因网上购物需要，想绑定一张银行卡到支付宝上进行快捷支付，由于其未在银行开通短信通知等其他及时通知服务，系统提示无法绑定，并提示其先要在银行开通短信通知服务才能成功绑定。该商业银行的上述系统设置不符合《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》相关规定

A客户是一位长期在境内外从事皮草贸易的商人，为了方便生活和工作该客户办理了一个全球通号码，同时该客户使用该手机号作为其在B银行开立账户的关联手机号，同时开通了短信提示功能以便于其了解自身账户情况。客户A在国外临时急需通过第三方支付机构C进行一笔小额划账业务，为方便客户，B银行通过手机短信方式与A客户确认并协助A客户通过C机构完成了本笔小额划账业务。由于系小额划账业务，B银行的做法符合《中国银监会 中国人民银行关于加强商业银行与第三方支付机构合作业务管理的通知》相关规定

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》规定，商业银行分行可以接受总行委托，代理市场营销和询价、项目发起和客户关系维护等操作性事项，也可以在金融交易市场单独开户

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》规定，商业银行法人总部对同业业务专营部门进行集中统一授权，专营部门不得办理未经授权或超授权的同业业务；专营部门在本部门授权范围内对其他部门或分支机构进行转授权

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》（银监办发〔2014〕140号）规定，商业银行同业业务专营部门可以委托其他部门或分支机构代为办理同业拆借、买入返售和卖出回购债券、同业存单等可通过金融交易市场进行电子化交易的同业业务

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》（银监办发〔2014〕140号）规定，本通知仅适用于中华人民共和国境内依法设立的商业银行与金融机构之间开展的以投融资为核心的各项同业业务，商业银行以外的其他银行业金融机构不需执行

按照《中国银监会办公厅关于规范商业银行同业业务治理的通知》（银监办发〔2014〕140号）规定，商业银行应具备与所开展同业业务规模和复杂程度相适应的同业业务治理体系，在法人总部对同业业务进行统一管理的基础上，各上级行对下辖机构的同业业务开展情况进行统筹管理