【单选题】
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?___
A. It is widely used to compare the economic growth across countries.
B. It revolutionizes the way of measuring ordinary people’s livelihood.
C. It focuses on people’s consumption rather that their average income.
D. It is a more comprehensive measure of people’s economic well-being.
查看试卷,进入试卷练习
微信扫一扫,开始刷题

答案
D
解析
暂无解析
相关试题
【单选题】
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?___
A. It reflected the existing big gap between the two economies.
B. It neglected many important indicators of people’s welfare.
C. It covered up the differences between individual citizens.
D. It failed to count in their difference in natural resources.
【单选题】
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?___
A. It can accurately pinpoint a country’s current economic problems.
B. It can help to raise people’s awareness of their economic well-being.
C. It can diagnose the causes of a country’s slowing pace of economic improvement.
D. It can compare a country’s economic conditions between different periods of time.
【单选题】
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?___
A. It is much better than that of their European counterparts.
B. It has been on the decline ever since the turn of the century.
C. It has not improved as much as reported by the Census Bureau.
D. It has not been accurately assessed and reported since mid-2000s.
【单选题】
大学生的成才目标是___。
A. 培养德智体美全面发展的人才
B. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者
C. 培养德智体美全面发展的社会主义建设者和接班人
D. 培养专业化、创新化的人才
【单选题】
___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。
A. 马克思主义的指导地位
B. 中国特色社会主义的共同理想
C. 民族精神和时代精神
D. 社会主义荣辱观
【单选题】
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___
A. 节省时间之举
B. 聪明灵活之举
C. 可供学习之举
D. 不遵守交通规则,违反社会公德之举
【单选题】
《公民道德建设实施纲要》明确指出,社会公德涵盖了___
A. 人与人之间的关系
B. 人与社会之间的关系
C. 人与自然之间的关系
D. 人与人、人与社会、人与自然之间的关系
【单选题】
为调整和规范人类社会生活三大领域,相应分别形成了___
A. 生活道德、职业道德、家庭道德
B. 生活道德、职业道德、社会公德
C. 社会公德、生活道德、职业道德
D. 社会公德、职业道德、家庭道德
推荐试题
【单选题】
13:下列交易码的功能描述中,不正确的是___
A. 0123用于客户信息维护,常见于维护单位法定代表人或负责人信息及客户名称;
B. 0131交易用于客户证件信息(证件类型、证件号码、客户名称)的修改;
C. 1132交易用于账户信息维护,包括基本信息维护、核准信息维护等;
D. 1059交易为单位验资户、临时户专用维护交易,维护内容包括临时户有效期、验资户的取现标志以及验资户转为基本户。
【单选题】
14:下列关于转账支票的背书,说法错误的是___
A. 从左往右依次背书,且背书必须连续;
B. 如若背书,第一背书人是转账支票上的付款人;
C. 如若背书,第一背书人是转账支票上的收款人;
D. 背书栏内只能填写与背书有关的信息,其他信息不得填写在背书人栏。
【单选题】
15:个人大额存单和单位大额存单的最低认购金额分别是___
A. 10万元和500万元
B. 20万元和1000万元
C. 50万元和2000万元
D. 100万元和5000万元
【单选题】
16:关于【1132单位账户维护】交易,以下说法正确的是 ___
A. 机构证件类型、证件号码为客户的关键信息,在本交易中可以修改;
B. 可以增加除主证件类型外的其他证件号码;
C. 可以通过本交易实现变更基本户开户行行名、行号、账号、开户许可证号码等信息;
D. 可以通过本交易维护验资户转为基本户。
【单选题】
17:【7107凭证行内使用】交易,做借据使用时,非当天使用销号的,应出具特殊业务申请省中心授权通过表,审批人职务应为___级别及以上。
A. 机构主管
B. 副行长(副主任)
C. 行长(主任)
D. 市县行社审批
【单选题】
18:依据《中国人民银行关于加强支付结算管理防范电信网络新型违法犯罪有关事项的通知》(银发〔2016〕261号)中的要求,目前对于I类户的开户数量限制为___
A. 同一客户在同一家银行(法人单位)只能开立一个I类户;
B. 同一客户在同一家银行(法人单位)可以开立两个I类户;
C. 同一客户在同一家银行(法人单位)可以开立三个I类户;
D. 同一客户在同一家银行(法人单位)可以开立四个I类户。
【单选题】
19:法院工作人员持扣款执行通知书到信用社某网点办理扣划业务,通知书上写明每月定时扣划被执行人袁某账户资金1000元,扣划总金额为11320,那么最后一次扣划金额应为___。
A. 1000元
B. 320元
C. 1320元
D. 20元
【单选题】
20:备案类账户使用【1058】单位活期账户启用交易启用时,授权应提供资料是___。
A. 开户许可证
B. 通过人行账户管理系统打印的开户信息
C. 客户影像
D. 法定代表人或负责人身份证件
【单选题】
21:【1132】单位账户维护交易维护账户透支额度时,无论是否由客户发起,除应提交资料外,还应按照《新一代IT系统业务操作规程》要求提交___
A. 市县行社与财政部门签订的协议或市县行社主管部门的审批资料;
B. 特殊业务申请省中心授权通过表;
C. 特殊业务申请书;
D. 支行行长(信用社主任)对该业务的相关审批。
【单选题】
22:使用【1109】久悬户手工处理交易,将单位账户从久悬户转为正常户时,下列有关授权应提交的资料说法错误的是___
A. 单位公函、客户有效证件,法定代表人或负责人身份证件,如为代理,需同时提供代理人身份证件和授权委托书;
B. 若为存折户,需同时提供存折;
C. 客户影像;
D. 县级行社财务部门审批表。
【单选题】
23:已故存款人的存款余额合计___以下的,各市县行社可根据实际情况,确定是否需要出具公证书或有权机关出具的法律文书。
A. 10000元(含)
B. 5000元(含)
C. 2000元(含)
D. 1000元(含)
【单选题】
29:【1204账户控制及维护】等用于控制、解控不良贷款客户存款账户资金的交易,需___行()名工作人员前往办理业务。
A. 贷款,1
B. 贷款,2
C. 存款所在 ,1
D. 存款所在,2
【单选题】
30:以下对8080交易要注意的问题中,错误的是___?
A. 有收、付款双方凭证的不需要提供个人业务交易单;
B. 该交易个人业务交易单需要上传背面影像
C. 交易凭证上大写金额要规范,大小写金额无须一致;
D. 交易凭证上账号、户名、金额均不允许修改。
【单选题】
31:对于个人账户开户1052交易,以下说法错误的是___?
A. 不需要上传新开存单;
B. 需要上传个人业务交易单正、背面;
C. 个人业务交易单背面填写和勾选必须与系统一致;
D. 1052业务不需要拍摄现金。
【单选题】
32:以下关于单据和凭证规范使用说法错误的是哪一个?___
A. 制式凭证中的勾选项可以修改,需修改的应在错误处加盖柜员私章,且修改不能超过三处,超过三处的应重新填写凭证。
B. 凭证的修改不允许使用修正液,使用修正液的凭证应做作废处理,重新填写。
C. 各种单折上应在规定的位置加盖业务章或公章,没有盖章的视为无效凭证。
D. 个人有卡(折)存取款、存单(折)正常销户不必填制个人业务交易单。
【单选题】
36:下列关于现金支票的审核要点,说法错误的是___
A. 大小写金额需填写相符;
B. 出票人签章要清晰、完整的盖在指定位置;
C. 大写日期需填写完整、正确;
D. 用途栏内容可不要求客户填写。
【单选题】
41: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?___
A. 可以直接进行开户
B. 审核企业基本存款账户唯一性,不管是否通过均可以开户
C. 审核企业基本存款账户唯一性, 通过唯一性审核的,可以开立基本存款账户
D. 审核企业基本存款账户唯一性,未通过唯一性审核的,可以开立基本存款账户
【单选题】
48:首次个人结算账户长期不动睡眠户治理时间为___
A. 2019年8月1日—2019年9 月 5日
B. 2019年8月5日—2019年9 月 5日
C. 2019年 4月10日—2019年5月15日
D. 2019年4月1日—2019年5月5日
【单选题】
50:因客户申请等原因“个人账户转睡眠户清单”中的账户,柜员可以通过___交易将其转为正常户,转为正常户后可办理挂失、转账、销户等业务。
A. 1206睡眠户转正常户
B. 1119睡眠户款项支取