To me (and the NYT) it's not okay for CEOs to lie and deceive in order to get legislation passed. Especially legislation that enriches their shareholders while hurting the average American taxpayer.
The exact amount they pay is not the issue, and we're in agreement that no laws were broken.
The issue is one of morality not legality. They deserve to be called on their BS and they were.
We have a difference in morals. You claim to have no problem with FedEx lying in order to enrich itself at the expense of hardworking regular people. I do have a problem with it. The New York Times has a problem with it. And judging by this comment section, a lot of hard working Americans have a problem with it.
There's really nothing you can say to morally justify it, which is why you keep deflecting with the "fake news", and "biased reporting" angle. That's all you've brought to the discussion. Yet curiously, you've not been able to cite a single element of the article that is false or misleading.
I'm not calling this fake news. I'm not suggesting it has any factual inaccuracies. I've offered what I feel is a reasonable delineation between straight news journalism and political propaganda. You just keep asserting you and others want to know this information without actually addressing what I'm saying.
If you disagree with me on where the line is between straight news journalism and political activism, that's fine. Can you please provide a general rule or set of rules that we can apply to all articles so that we can tell the difference between journalism and political activism?
Let's go up a few comments where you said:
>I'm still failing to see where this is "news" as opposed to "agenda."
It's right there.
>Can you please provide a general rule or set of rules that we can apply to all articles so that we can tell the difference between journalism and political activism
You made a claim that the article is "propaganda", "activism" and "agenda" (your words). So the onus would be on you to prove your claim. Or at least offer a coherent argument why you believe that. As far as I can tell, the only thing that makes this propaganda in your eyes is (a) it's from the NYT and (b) it opposes your worldview somehow.
Anyhow, I'm going to stop here with this particular thread.
I never said I felt a moral claim to the lost tax revenue. Ever. I've repeated over and over (and over) that it's the lying to the American people that I, and many others find morally repugnant. I don't know how to state it any clearer. I honestly don't. I've made no comments whatsoever of a political nature. Not one.
Is there something about disliking lying which is inherently political? I learned that lying was bad in kindergarten before I even knew what politics was.
You've already proven yourself to be arguing in bad faith with your "I'm not calling this fake news" lie (see directly above), so there's no point in continuing this conversation.
I guess liars defending liars is exactly what I should have expected.
If NYT believes FedEx should pay more in taxes, if the NYT wants the law changed for any reason, I think that's fantastic. I welcome them to register as a PAC, subject themselves to the relevant regulations, give up their press passes, and fight for better tax law.