未知题型
下列关于生产安全事故应急预案的实施和奖罚的说法错误的是（ ）。——P256
- A.生产工艺和技术发生变化时，应急预案应当及时修订
B.施工单位每年至少组织一次专项应急预案的演练
C.施工单位的应急预案未备案的，可被警告并处以3万元以下罚款
D.施工单位每季度至少组织一次现场处置方案的演练
【参考答案】
D,D
点击查看答案
相关考题
-
未知题型
职业健康安全与环境管理体系（ ），是对组织整个管理体系的整体性描述，它为体系的进一步展开以及后续程序文件的制定提供了框架要求和原则规定，是管理体系的纲领性文件。——P225
A.程序文件
B.管理手册
C.作业文件
D.工作记录 -
未知题型
下列不属于建设工程项目进度控制在管理观念方面存在的主要问题的是（ ）。——P156
A.缺乏进度计划系统的观念
B.缺乏多方案，比较和选优的观念
C.缺乏计划系统集成的观念
D.缺乏动态控制的观念 -
未知题型
The National Association of Securities Dealers is investigating whether some brokerage houses are inappropriately pushing individuals to borrow large sums on their houses to invest in the stock market. Can we persuade the association to investigate would-be privatizers of Social Security? For it is now apparent that the Bush administration's privatization proposal will amount to the same thing, borrow trillions, put the money in the stock market and hope. Privatization would begin by diverting payroll taxes, which pay for current Social Security benefits, into personal investment accounts. The government would have to borrow to make up the shortfall. This would sharply increase the government's debt. 'Never mind', privatization advocates say, 'in the long run, people would make so much on personal accounts that the government could save money by cutting retirees' benefits.' Even so, if personal investment accounts were invested in Treasury bonds, this whole process would accomplish precisely nothing. The interest workers would receive on their accounts would exactly match the interest the government would have to pay on its additional debt. To compensate for the initial borrowing, the government would have to cut future benefits so much that workers would gain nothing at all. However, privatizers claim that these investments would make a lot of money and that, in effect, the government, not the workers, would reap most of those gains, because as personal accounts grew, the government could cut benefits. We can argue at length about whether the high stock returns such schemes assume are realistic (they aren't), but let's cut to the chase: in essence, such schemes involve having the government borrow heavily and put the money in the stock market. That's because the government would, in effect, confiscate workers' gains in their personal accounts by cutting those workers' benefits. Once you realize what privatization really means, it doesn't sound too responsible, does it? But the details make it considerably worse. First, financial markets would, correctly, treat the reality of huge deficits today as a much more important indicator of the government's fiscal health than the mere promise that government could save money by cutting benefits in the distant future. After all, a government bond is a legally binding promise to pay, while a benefits formula that supposedly cuts costs 40 years from now is nothing more than a suggestion to future Congresses. If a privatization plan passed in 2005 called for steep benefit cuts in 2045, what are the odds that those cuts would really happen? Second, a system of personal accounts would pay huge brokerage fees. Of course, from Wall Street's point of view that's a benefit, not a cost.According to the author, 'privatizers' are those ______ .A．who borrow from banks to invest in the stock marketB．who invest in Treasury bondsC．who advocate the government to borrow money from citizensD．who earn large sums of money in personal accounts
A.
B.'
C.
D.
E.
According
F.
A．who
G.who
H.who
I.who
