不法分子在盗、抢原油中因不慎所导致自身受到伤害 ,由谁负责 ?( )[1分] ___

《安全生产法》第四十九条规定，生产经营单位与从业人员订立的劳动合同，应当载明有关保障从业人员劳动安全和( )的事项。[1分] ___

管道标记均应设置在管道正输方向的（）。[1分] ___

巡线员应定期对线路进行巡护，日常巡线，每日（ ）次；徒步巡线每两周（ ）次；台风、暴雨等恶劣天气取消当日巡线，恶劣天气次日重点巡查山区线路是否存在冲沟、露管、悬空等现象；[1分] ___

根据《刑法》第 343 条规定 ,非法采油 ,造成矿产资源破坏的 ,以下说法正确的是 ? ( )[1分] ___

管道设施沿线地方的( ),应当加强对管道设施保护工作的组织领导。[1分] ___

（）受理土地复垦验收申请后，应当会同同级农业、林业、环境保护等部门组织土地复垦验收。[1分] ___

县级以上人民政府（）依照本条例规定的职责，负责本行政区域内管道保护的相关监督管理工作，以及危害管道安全违法行为的查处。[1分] ___

下列不属于《石油天然气管道保护法》规定的禁止危害管道安全的行为有 :( )[1分] ___

巡线员在山区和草木茂盛地段徒步巡线时，应穿高邦鞋，穿着长衣长裤和佩戴帽子，扣紧衣领袖口裤口，必要时在裸露部位涂抹防虫药剂，并控制好步行速度，防止（ ）和被蛇虫咬伤。[1分] ___

当一级地区旱地管道埋深小于（ ）米以及二级、三级、四级地区旱地管道埋深小于0.8米、水田地区管道埋深小于（ ）米时，必须对该段管道采用盖板、箱涵等保护措施。[1分] ___

在输油管道上打眼盗油的行为 ,以( )罪进行处理 ?[1分] ___

任何单位在管道设施安全保护范围内进行下列哪些施工时都应事先通知管道企业 ,并采取相应保护措施。 ( )[1分] ___

由县级以上人民政府发展和改革（能源）主管部门责令限期改正的管道企业，逾期不改正的，对直接负责的主管人员和其他直接责任人员，由有权机关依法给予（）。[1分] ___

《安全生产法》第一百零六条规定，某企业主要负责人在本单位发生重大生产安全事故后逃匿，应当处( )日以下的拘留。[1分] ___

巡线时应重点检查穿越管道（ ）和（ ）地面有无明显变化、跨越管道本体有无异常变化等。[1分] ___

汛前应重点检查穿跨越河流管道有无裸露、（ ）、（ ） 、剥蚀损坏等情况，水工保护有无裂纹、倾斜、塌方、沉降、镂空等现象；[1分] ___

县级以上地方人民政府应当加强对本行政区域管道保护工作的领导 ,督促、检查有关部门依法履行管道保护职责 ,组织排除管道的重大 ( )安全隐患。[1分] ___

下列四种植物中，石油天然气管道线路中心线两侧各五米地域范围内可以种植的是（）。[1分] ___

管道企业在紧急情况下进行管道抢修作业 ,可以先行使用他人土地或者设施 ,但应当及时告知土地或者设施的（）和（）。[1分] ___

我国对石油天然气管理的新特点是什么 ? ( )[1分] ___

《安全生产法》第六十二条规定，安全监督管理部门对违法生产、储存、使用、经营、运输的危险物品的作业场所予以（ ），并依法作出处理决定。[1分] ___

纳入城乡规划的管道建设用地，不得擅自改变用途。县级以上人民政府（）不得在管道建设用地范围内批准妨碍管道建设的其他建设项目。[1分] ___

以下查扣盗油车辆的做法正确的是 ?( )[1分] ___

职业病病人的诊疗、( )费用，伤残以及丧失劳动能力的职业病病人的社会保障，按照国家有关工伤保险的规定执行。[1分] ___

石油天然气管道是一个（）的输送系统。[1分] ___

发现管道保护范围内的第三方施工时，应了解并查明施工影响区域、施工进度、施工期限、建设相关方等信息，核对管道及光缆位置及埋深、（ ）、与管道及光缆的垂直间距和水平间距等。[1分] ___

《安全生产法》第八十条规定，企业发生生产安全事故后，事故现场有关人员应当立即报告( )。[1分] ___

施工单位在管道线路中心线两侧各（）以及管道附属设施周边一百米地域范围内，进行新建、改建、扩建铁路、公路、河渠，架设电力线路，埋设地下电缆、光缆，设置安全接地体、避雷接地体等施工作业时，应当向管道所在地县级以上人民政府发展和改革（能源）主管部门提出申请。[1分] ___

高后果区的加密桩间隔应不大于50米，特殊情况，如遇到河流、道路、建筑物等无法安装加密桩时，应在可以安装的（ ） 地方安装加密桩。[1分] ___

用人单位工作场所存在职业病目录所列职业病的（ ）因素的，应当及时、如实向所在地卫生行政部门申报危害项目，接受监督。[1分] ___

《安全生产法》第五十二条规定，从业人员发现直接危及人身安全的紧急情况时，在( )后撤离现场。[1分] ___

巡线员巡线时宜沿管道路由走向到达所设置的必到点，在每一个巡线必到点至少停留（ ），巡查管道周边环境是否存在异常变化；[1分] ___

违反《浙江省石油天然气管道建设和保护条例》规定，实施危害管道安全行为的，由县级以上人民政府（）对违法修建的建筑物或者其他设施，责令限期拆除，并处以罚款。[1分] ___

县级以上人民政府发展和改革（能源）主管部门、公安机关依照《浙江省石油天然气管道建设和保护条例》的规定作出责令限期拆除的决定后，当事人逾期不拆除的，由作出责令限期拆除决定的部门报请本级人民政府责成有关部门依法强制拆除。强制拆除的费用，由（）承担。[1分] ___

《安全生产法》第三十三条规定，企业必须对安全设备进行( )维护、保养。[1分] ___

管道建成后应当按照国家有关规定进行竣工验收，（）发展和改革（能源）主管部门应当组织管道保护方面的专家进行专项验收。[1分] ___

《安全生产法》第四十二条规定，企业应当为从业人员提供符合 ( )的劳动防护用品，不符合要求的，不准提供。[1分] ___

《浙江省石油天然气管道建设和保护条例》适用于本省行政区域内输送（）管道以及管道附属设施（以下统称管道）的建设和保护。[1分] ___

《安全生产法》第六十条规定，对未依法取得批准或者验收合格的单位擅自从事有关活动的，负责行政审批的部门发现或者接到举报后，应当立即( )。[1分] ___

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___

回答人为什么活着___

表明人应当怎样对待生活___

判别什么样的人生才有意义___

下列人生态度中正确的是___

下列属于正确的人生目的的是___

___认为,金钱可以主宰一切.

___ 认为，社会和他人是达到个人目的的手段。

___认为，人生的全部内容就在于满足感官的需求与快乐。

马克思对于人的本质的论断确立与___

人与自然关系的实质是___

在社会交往和公共生活中公民应该遵守的道德准则是___

社会公德最基本的要求是___

通过其规定和实施，影响人们思想，培养和提高人们法律意识，引导人们依法行为的作用是法律的___

有序的公共生活是构建和谐社会的___