【单选题】
( )是指故意骗取、盗用财产或违反监管规章、法律或公司政策导致的损失,此类事件至少涉及内部一方,但不包括歧视及差别待遇事件。___
A. 内部欺诈
B. 失职违规
C. 督导落实
D. 检查整改
查看试卷,进入试卷练习
微信扫一扫,开始刷题

答案
A
解析
暂无解析
相关试题
【单选题】
( )是指银行内部员工因过失没有按照雇佣合同、内部员工守则、相关业务及管理规定操作或者办理业务造成的风险。___
A. 内部欺诈
B. 知识/技能匮乏
C. 违反用工法
D. 失职违规
【单选题】
( )是指各类文件档案的制定、管理不善,包括不合适的或不健全的文档结构、协议中出现错误或缺乏协议等,历来是各银行加强关键流程控制的重点。___
A. 财务/会计错误
B. 产品设计缺陷
C. 错误监控/报告
D. 文件/合同缺陷
【单选题】
( )是指银行为公司、个人、金融机构等客户提供的产品在业务管理框架、权利义务结构、风险管理要求等方面存在不完善、不健全等问题。___
A. 产品设计缺陷
B. 财务/会计错误
C. 错误监控/报告
D. 文件/合同缺陷
【单选题】
本国政府或银行海外机构所在地政府诞生新的立法、公共利益集团的持续压力/运动、极端组织的行动/蓄意破坏、政变/政府更替等事件给银行造成经济损失属于的风险种类是( )。___
A. 政治风险
B. 国别风险
C. 流动性风险
D. 重新定价风险
【单选题】
( )是指银行未遵守金融监管当局的规定而可能造成的损失,在出台新的金融监管规定、金融监管加强、金融监管者发生改变、金融监管重点发生变化时,较易出现此方面的风险。___
A. 监管规定
B. 外部欺诈
C. 洗钱
D. 政治风险
【单选题】
( )是指由于外部供应商的过错而导致服务或供应中断或撤销而造成的损失,例如供电局拉闸限电、系统服务外包机构破产等。___
A. 业务外包
B. 监管规定
C. 外部欺诈
D. 洗钱
【单选题】
( )是在银行内部控制体系的基础上,通过开展全员风险识别,识别出全行经营管理中存在的风险点,并从影响程度和发生概率两个角度来评估操作风险的重要程度。___
A. 历史模拟情景法
B. 自我评估法
C. 极值理论法
D. 假定特殊事件法
【单选题】
下列可以体现操作风险差异性的是( )。___
A. 操作风险管理实际上覆盖了银行经营管理中几乎所有方面的不同风险
B. 业务规模小、交易量小、结构变化不太迅速的业务领域
C. 引起操作风险的因素较复杂
D. 操作风险会转化为其他风险
【单选题】
( )是在量化分析风险点分布、发生概率和损失程度的基础上,采用适当的缓释工具,限制、降低或分散操作风险。___
A. 操作风险缓释
B. 操作风险评估
C. 风险预警
D. 资信评估
【单选题】
( )是国内银行竞相发展的零售银行业务,包括个人住房按揭贷款、个人大额耐用消费品贷款、个人生产经营贷款和个人质押贷款等业务品种。___
A. 中间业务
B. 法人信贷业务
C. 柜台业务
D. 个人信贷业务
【单选题】
( )是指银行为满足客户保值或提高自身资金收益或防范市场风险等方面的需要,利用各种金融工具进行的资金和交易活动。___
A. 柜台业务
B. 资金交易业务
C. 中间业务
D. 法人信贷业务
【单选题】
( )是指对一个或多个操作风险敞口,通过反映操作风险发生可能性或影响度或某一控制有效性,对该风险或控制进行定性或定量跟踪监测的操作风险管理流程。___
A. 风险与控制评估
B. 关键风险指标
C. 操作风险关键风险指标
D. 损失数据收集
【单选题】
监控工作要能够反映操作风险全局状况及变化趋势,揭示诱发操作风险的系统性原因,实现对全行操作风险状况的预警,反映了关键风险指标监控应遵循的( )原则。___
A. 重要性
B. 整体性
C. 敏感性
D. 可靠性
【单选题】
( )可选择己经识别出来的主要操作风险因素,并结合银行的内、外部操作风险损失事件数据形成统计分析指标,用于评估银行整体的操作风险水平,该方法的难点在于对各项关键指标设定合理的阈值,即风险指标处于何种范围之内可以被认为是处于较低风险水平、中等风险水平或较高风险水平,并针对不同评估结果采取何种适当的风险控制措施。___
A. 历史模拟情景法
B. 关键风险指标法
C. 自我评估法
D. 极值理论法
【单选题】
在统计操作风险损失事件时,要对损失金额较大和发生频率较高的操作风险损失事件进行重点审查和确认,要对重点地区、重要业务线及产品的操作风险损失事件进行认真识别和监测,反应的损失数据收集应遵循的原则是( )。___
A. 准确性原则
B. 统一性原则
C. 谨慎性原则
D. 重要性原则
【单选题】
应及时确认、完整记录、准确统计因操作风险事件导致的实际资产损失,避免因提前或延后造成当期统计数据不准确;对因操作风险损失事件带来的声誉影响,要及时分析和报告,但不要求量化损失,反应的损失数据收集应遵循的原则是( )。___
A. 重要性原则
B. 准确性原则
C. 统一性原则
D. 谨慎性原则
【单选题】
操作风险损失事件的统计标准、范围、程序和方法要保持一致,以确保统计结果客观、准确及可比,反应的损失数据收集应遵循的原则是( )。___
A. 重要性原则
B. 准确性原则
C. 谨慎性原则
D. 统一性原则
【单选题】
( )主要是填报单个损失事件的内容,对于每个损失事件,需要通过系统记录事件的事实情况、总体的财务损失金额以及逐笔损失、成本或挽回的明细信息。___
A. '损失事件填报'
B. '损失事件识别'
C. '损失金额确定'
D. '损失事件信息审核'
【单选题】
( )是一种自发的对风险、控制、风险防范手段的分析和评价,公开地讨论操作风险管理中的成效和不足,这一工具是银行识别、计量、分析操作风险的一种有效手段,被国际主流银行广泛采用。___
A. 风险控制自我评估
B. 资信评估
C. 关键风险指标
D. 事件与损失管理
【单选题】
根据《银行资本管理办法(试行)》第( )的规定,'银行可采用基本指标法、标准法或高级计量法计量操作风险资本要求'。___
A. 九十三条
B. 九十五条
C. 八十条
D. 八十五条
【单选题】
( )基本思路是:银行所持有的操作风险资本等于前三年总收入的平均值乘上一个固定比例(用α表示)。___
A. 基本指标法
B. 关键风险指标法
C. 自我评估法
D. 极值理论法
【单选题】
( )指将银行的所有业务划分为九条业务线,计算时需要获得每个业务条线的总收入,然后根据各条线不同的操作风险资本要求系数β,分别求出对应的资本,最后加总得到银行总体操作风险资本要求。___
A. 基本指标法
B. 关键风险指标法
C. 标准法
D. 自我评估法
推荐试题
【单选题】
直线论的错误在于只看到___
A. 事物发展的周期性而否认了前进性
B. 事物发展的前进性而否认了曲折性
C. 事物发展的间接性而否认了连续性
D. 事物发展的曲折性而否认了周期性
【单选题】
循环论的错误在于___
A. 只看到事物发展的普遍性,没有看到事物发展过程的特殊性
B. 只看到事物的绝对运动,没有看到事物的相对静止
C. 只看到事物发展道路的曲折性,没有看到事物发展趋势的前进性
D. 只看到新旧事物之间的连续性,没有看到新旧事物之间的间断性
【单选题】
辩证法所说的矛盾是指___
A. 人们思维中的前后不一的自相矛盾
B. 事物之间或事物内部各要素之间的对立统一
C. 对立面之间的相互排斥
D. 事物之间或事物内部各要素之间的相互依赖
【单选题】
依据是___
A. 矛盾的同一性和斗争性辩证关系的原理
B. 矛盾的普遍性和特殊性辩证关系的原理
C. 事物发展的量变和质变辩证关系的原理
D. 事物发展的内因和外因辩证关系的原理
【单选题】
矛盾问题的精髓是___
A. 矛盾的普遍性和特殊性关系的问题
B. 矛盾的同一性和斗争性关系的问题
C. 主要矛盾和次要矛盾关系的问题
D. 矛盾的主要方面和次要方面关系的问题
【单选题】
真象和假象的区别在于___
A. 真象是客观的,假象是主观的
B. 真象表现本质,假象不表现本质
C. 真象深藏于事物内部,假象外露于事物外部
D. 真象从正面直接地表现本质,假象从反面歪曲地表现本质
【单选题】
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___
A. 辩证唯物主义决定论的观点
B. 形而上学的机械决定论的观点
C. 唯心主义非决定论的观点
D. 庸俗唯物主义的观点
【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 think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___
A. It is based on questionable statistics.
B. It reflects the economic changes.
C. It evidences the improved welfare.
D. It provides much food for thought.
【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.
【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