“机不可失，时不再来”指的是___

是 ___

在客观规律面前，人的主观能动性表现在___

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?___

我国劳动力市场出现以后，工人的主人翁地位___

新时期农民问题的核心是___

现阶段我国知识分子是___

我国社会主义时期民族关系的根本特征是___

坚持民族平等和民族团结，促进各民族的共同繁荣，这是我国解决民族问题的___

加强民族团结，促进共同繁荣的关键是___

统一战线的基础是___

在新时期统一战线的两个联盟中___

新时期划分两个联盟的依据是___

社会主义时期民族问题的实质是___

加强党的建设要围绕着___

党的建设处于首要地位的是___

十一届三中全会以来我党恢复和发扬的学风是___

在党的纪律面前___

加强各级领导班子建设的重点是___

选拔干部的原则是___

要搞好社会风气，关键是要搞好___

党的宗旨是___

建设有中国特色社会主义全部工作的出发点和落脚点是___

党的干部必须把对上级负责和对群众负责___

党风问题的实质是___

反对腐败与经济建设的关系是___

保持党的先进性和纯洁性，增强党的凝聚力和战斗力的保证是___

全国人民团结奋斗的共同利益基础是___

党的建设的首要任务是___

在毛泽东关于党的建设思想中，提到世界观和党性原则的高度的思想是___

早在民主革命时期，毛泽东在回答民主人士黄炎培提出的中国共产党如何跳出历史上历代封建王朝“其兴也勃焉”，“其亡也忽焉”的“周期律”问题时，提出我们的方法是___

“总体小康”和“全面建设小康社会”并无区别。___

中国共产党对台湾的方针政策一直没有改变。___

1917年十月革命的胜利开辟了世界无产阶级社会主义革命的新时代，标志着人类历史开始了由资本主义向社会主义转变的进程，因此，中国新民主主义革命实质上是无产阶级社会主义革命。___

毛泽东曾总结指出：中国共产党区别于其他政党的显著标志是理论和实践相结合的作风，和人民群众紧密联系在一起的作风，以及独立自主的作风。___

中央提出：毛泽东思想的活的灵魂是贯穿在其全部内容中的立场、观点和方法，主要有三个基本方面，即实事求是、群众路线、自我批评。___

“三个代表”重要思想的集中概括是中国共产党必须始终代表先进生产力，代表先进文化的前进方向，代表中国最广大人民的根本利益。___

小资产阶级是资产阶级的一部分，因此最终也是中国革命的敌人。___

“三大优良作风”是中国共产党区别于其他一切政党的显著标志。___

大资产阶级是中国民主革命的主要对象之一，因此它始终被排除在统一战线之外。___

毛泽东思想就是毛泽东个人的思想___

毛泽东思想是关于中国革命的正确理论原则和经验总结___

毛泽东思想与中国特色社会主义理论体系是两个相互独立的理论体系___

“三个代表”重要思想就是指“三个代表”三句话。___