"Congress should clarify that the “regular rate” for overtime pay is based on the salary paid rather than all benefits provided. This would enable employers to offer additional benefits to employees without fear that those benefits would dramatically increase overtime pay"
I don't understand this one. I've never heard of anyone making OT on benefits.
It's a rule the DoL issued in 2019 to "clarify" the prior FLSA regulations. I've also never heard of getting OT on benefits and I doubt there was any real confusion. Whether its good policy, I dunno. It's plausible to me that including non-cash compensation in overtime would disincentive benefits in a way that left the worker worse off, but, ya know, maybe healthcare and retirement shouldn't be contingent on one's employer.
Anyway, this is the Heritage Foundation trying to convert that rule to a law.
I would like one and a half health insurances when I work late, please.
from what that link says, it sounds like the rule was made mostly to get around employers saying "this part of your paycheck is a bonus, not a wage, so it's exempt from the time and a half rule"
That's a good point. I suppose this could be important for folks paid on commission and things like that.
Ctrl+F any common policy issue or buzzword, and get ready for a wild ride! The whole document is a fever dream.
Today the Left is threatening the tax-exempt status of churches and charities that reject woke progressivism. They will soon turn to Christian schools and clubs with the same totalitarian intent.
Contemporary elites have even repurposed the worst ingredients of 1970s “radical chic” to build the totalitarian cult known today as “The Great Awokening.”
"The Great Awokening"
Goddamn if they don't come up with some absolute bangers
I don’t want to threaten the tax-exempt status of religious schools, I want them completely banned.
The Great Awokening
Who makes this shit up? It's legitimately insane. If it wasn't real I'd call this a complex shitpost by a fellow Hexbear
This basically reads like what was carried out in Ukraine post-2014.
Perhaps Ukraine might eventually be viewed the same way Chile under Pinochet is viewed as a test prior to rolling out neoliberalism.
" in one highly influential sage-grouse monograph"
wiki - "On December 6, 2018, the government announced a plan to roll back protections for the sage grouse to open nine million acres of land to wind and solar farms, drilling, mining, and cornfields for the production of government mandated ethanol."
The promise of socialism—Communism, Marxism, progressivism, Fascism, whatever name it chooses—is simple: Government control of the economy can ensure equal outcomes for all people. The problem is that it has never done so. There is no such thing as “the government.” There are just people who work for the government and wield its power and who—at almost every opportunity—wield it to serve themselves first and everyone else a distant second. This is not a failing of one nation or socialist party, but inherent in human nature.
The Government is a social construct! Its not real, but people do work there!
As with all global struggles with Communist and other tyrannical regimes, the issue should never be with the Chinese people but with the Communist dictator- ship that oppresses them and threatens the well-being of nations across the globe. That said, the nature of Chinese power today is the product of history, ideology, and the institutions that have governed China during the course of five millennia, inherited by the present Chinese leaders from the preceding generations of the CCP. In short, the PRC challenge is rooted in China’s strategic culture and not just the Marxism–Leninism of the CCP, meaning that internal culture and civil society will never deliver a more normative nation. The PRC’s aggressive behavior can only be curbed through external pressure
"I dont have an issue with the people of China, just their government!"
Classic.
Imagine being American and thinking that China "threatens the well-being of nations across the globe", or that China behaves aggressively.
