间歇性的精神病人甲，在不能辨认自己行为的情况下实施了殴打他人的行为，公安机关受理该案件后，应当对甲减轻或者不予处罚。

醉酒的人在醉酒状态中，对本人有危险或者对他人的人身、财产或公共安全有威胁的，应当将其拘留至酒醒。

王某因在公共场所裸露身体被公安民警带至办案场所进行询问。经查，王某是精神病患者，正处于精神病发作期间。公安机关对于王某在公共场所裸露身体的行为不予处罚，但应当责令王某的监护人严加看管和治疗。

李某1月在酒吧实施了寻衅滋事行为，同年3月主动向公安机关投案，并向公安机关如实陈述自己的违法行为，公安机关应减轻处罚或者不予处罚。

违反治安管理行为人主动消除或者减轻违法后果的，减轻处罚或者不予处罚。

王某实施了盗窃违法行为，后向公安机关主动投案，如实陈述盗窃行为，对于王某应当减轻处罚或者不予处罚。

对违反治安管理行为，《治安管理处罚法》规定拘留并处罚款的，若行为人具有减轻处罚情节，可以在法定处罚幅度以下单独或者同时减轻拘留和罚款，或者在法定处罚幅度内单处拘留。

李某10月因违反治安管理行为受到罚款处罚，次年5月因殴打他人被公安机关调查，公安机关应当对李某殴打他人行为从重处罚。

违反治安管理行为人实施的违法行为有较严重的后果，不属于《治安管理处罚法》规定的从重处罚情节。

违反治安管理行为人在12个月内曾受过治安管理处罚的，应当从重处罚。

违反治安管理行为人对报案人、控告人、举报人、证人打击报复的，应当从重处罚。

有两种以上违反治安管理行为的，分别决定，合并执行，拘留执行期限进行累加。

教唆、胁迫、诱骗他人违反治安管理的，按照其教唆、胁迫、诱骗的行为处罚。

共同违反治安管理的，根据违反治安管理行为人在违反治安管理行为中所起的作用，分别处罚。

教唆、胁迫、诱骗他人违反治安管理的，按照其教唆、胁迫、诱骗的行为从重处罚。

赵某因盗窃数额未达到法定起诉标准，某县公安局决定给予赵某行政拘留处罚。在处罚前涉嫌盗窃罪被刑事拘留的时间，应当折抵行政拘留，刑事拘留1日折抵行政拘留1日。

被拘留人在被行政拘留前因同一行为被依法拘传、刑事拘留、取保候审的时间都不能折抵行政拘留时间。

如果被行政拘留人被刑事拘留、逮捕的时间已超过被行政拘留的时间，则行政拘留不再执行，办案部门也不用将治安管理处罚决定书送达被处罚人。

 张某（17周岁）因寻衅滋事行为，被A县公安机关给予行政拘留处罚。由于张某不满18周岁，应当不执行行政拘留处罚。

怀孕或者哺乳自己不满1周岁婴儿的妇女实施违法行为的，不应当给予行政拘留处罚。

为了查明案情进行鉴定的期间，不计入办理治安案件的期限。

不计入办理治安案件期限的“鉴定期间”，是指公安机关提交鉴定之日起至鉴定机构作出鉴定意见并送达公安机关的期间。

某派出所在办理一起盗窃案件中，因违法行为人案发后逃跑，造成案件不能在法定期限内办结，公安机关可以暂停进行调查取证，待将违反治安管理行为人抓获后，继续进行调查取证。

公安派出所承办的案情重大、复杂的案件，需要延长办案期限的，应当报所属县级以上公安机关负责人批准。

对因违反治安管理行为人逃跑等客观原因造成案件在法定期限内无法作出行政处理决定的，公安机关应当继续进行调查取证，并向被侵害人说明情况，及时依法作出处理决定。123、公安机关办理治安案件的期限，自受理之日起不得超过30日；案情重大、复杂的，经本级公安机关负责人批准，可以延长30日。

经上一级公安机关批准，可以延长三十日，而非经本级公安机关负责人批准。124、公安派出所民警顾某抓获1名涉嫌盗窃的违法嫌疑人，虽然案件事实清楚证据确实充分，但是因为无法查清嫌疑人的身份，不能对该嫌疑人作出处罚决定。

【解析：】《公安机关办理行政案件程序规定》第一百四十二条 违法嫌疑人不讲真实姓名、住址，身份不明，但只要违法事实清楚、证据确实充分的，可以按其自报的姓名、贴附照片作出处理决定，并在相关法律文书中注明。125、违法行为人不讲真实姓名、住址的，只要违法事实清楚，证据确实充分，公安机关就可以按其自报的姓名、贴附照片作出处罚决定，并在相关法律文书中注明。

【解析：】《公安机关办理行政案件程序规定》第一百四十二条 违法嫌疑人不讲真实姓名、住址，身份不明，但只要违法事实清楚、证据确实充分的，可以按其自报的姓名、贴附照片作出处理决定，并在相关法律文书中注明。126、公安机关在作出行政处罚决定前，应当告知违法嫌疑人拟作出行政处罚决定的事实、理由及依据，并告知违法嫌疑人依法享有陈述权和申辩权等权利。

 公安机关在查处违反治安管理行为时，应当告知当事人应有的权利，并保障当事人充分享有陈述权、申辩权、要求举行听证权、申请行政复议权、提起行政诉讼权等权利。

甲向某派出所投案，并主动供述自己盗窃他人自行车的行为。派出所经调查，没有其他证据证明甲的违法行为，对甲不能作出治安管理处罚决定。

治安案件调查结束后，发现违反治安管理行为人有其他违法行为的，公安机关应当在对违反治安管理行为作出处罚决定的同时，通知有关行政主管部门处理。

某区公安分局依法对李某作出行政拘留5日的行政处罚，该行政处罚决定书应当由作出处罚决定的人民警察签名并盖章。

公安机关无法当场向被处罚人宣告治安管理处罚决定书的，应当在2个工作日内送达被处罚人。

违法行为涉嫌构成犯罪的，转为刑事案件办理或者移送有权处理的主管机关、部门办理，公安机关应当撤销行政案件。

确有违法行为，但有依法不予行政处罚情形的，作出不予行政处罚决定；有违法所得和非法财物的，应当予以退还。

在办理治安案件中，无论是依据一般程序还是简易程序作出的处罚决定，只要有被侵害人，公安机关都应当将处罚决定书副本抄送被侵害人。

治安案件有被侵害人的，公安机关应当将行政处罚决定书原件送达被侵害人。

治安管理处罚由县级以上人民政府公安机关决定，其中警告、500元以下的罚款可以由公安派出所决定。

【解析：】《治安管理处罚法》第九十一条 治安管理处罚由县级以上人民政府公安机关决定；其中警告、五百元以下的罚款可以由公安派出所决定。137、甲因殴打他人被某县公安局作出行政拘留5日的行政处罚，甲对行政处罚决定不服，依法应当先申请行政复议后再提起行政诉讼。

对公安机关因民间纠纷引起的打架斗殴或者损坏他人财物等治安案件进行的调解处理不服的，不能申请行政复议。

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___。

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___