Daily Archives: May 27, 2021

Theres plenty of wrangling in Congress right now regarding potential changes to Americas corporate tax code. The corporate tax rate currently stands at 21%. However, Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., prefers a 25% rate, while President Joe Biden is aiming for 28%. Regardless of the rate, though, Congress must still address an overlooked problem: Plenty of larger U.S. multinational corporations are continuing to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

Corporate tax reform is obviously a thorny issue. But several of Americas largest tech companies just came out in favor of Bidens suggested 28% rate. Through a partnership with the brand-new Chamber of Progress, Amazon, Google, and Facebook have jointly offered support for Bidens proposal. Its a nice gesture on their part, but rather hollowsince theyll hardly be affected by any tax increase.

Last year, the Coalition for a Prosperous America published a report showing U.S. multinational corporations paid an average of only 8.7% in corporate taxes in 2019far less than the current 21% rate. Large tech companies remain some of the prime beneficiaries of this tax avoidance since they repeatedly shift much of their profits to Bermuda and other tax haven nations.

Amazon is a perfect example. The e-commerce giant paid zero state or federal taxes in 2018 despite earning more than $11 billion in profits. While enjoying massive revenues, Amazon simply took advantage of current tax loopholesand assigned much of its profit to low-tax countries outside of the U.S.

When companies like Amazon shift profit abroad, they shrink the available U.S. tax base. And so its somewhat disingenuous for them to support the 28% Biden tax proposal because it will hardly affect their bottom line. Essentially, if Congress votes to raise Americas corporate tax rate by 7% but doesnt simultaneously address tax avoidance, multinational corporations would likely face only a small increase. However, domestic companies would have to carry the full amount.

Gaming the system like this offers a competitive advantage. Amazon paid a mere 4.3% average tax rate over the last three years while competing with thousands of brick-and-mortar retailers across the country. If the U.S. corporate tax rate climbs to 28%, these Main Street businesses will bear an outsized portion of the increasenot Amazon.

Concerns about such tax disparities arent new, though. The Coalition for a Prosperous America estimates that multinationals avoided paying $97.8 billion in corporate taxes in 2019. In response, the Biden administration has even offered some potential solutions through its Made in America tax plan. However, the complexity of these proposals could make them unwieldy and hard to sell in Congress.

Whats needed is simplicity and equity. Since Bidens Build Back Better plan aims to strengthen domestic U.S. manufacturing, its time to implement a system that fully taxes all multinational companies. The logical answer is to adopt a system of sales factor apportionment in order to impose taxes specifically on the location of a companys final sale. That means if a company generates $1 billion of profit on its U.S. sales, it should pay U.S. corporate taxes on that $1 billion. No more convoluted profit calculationsor claiming residence in an obscure, offshore locationin order to skirt U.S. tax obligations.

Americas large tech companies are among the multinationals that keep dodging a full tax load. Its somewhat meaningless, then, that they appear to be supportive of a tax hike. In reality, their main goal is to prevent anything that would include more of their profits in the U.S. tax base.

The American people already recognize that its unfair for multinational firms to sell products in the U.S. market but pay little or no federal taxes. That includes the tech firms that consistently generate massive profits from U.S. consumers. Its time to shift to an SFA system that closes loopholes and ensures that all companies pay their fair share of taxes.

David Morse is tax policy director at the Coalition for a Prosperous America Education Fund. Follow him on Twitter @CentristinIdaho. He wrote this for InsideSources.com.

Follow this link:

Morse: Don't be fooled by Big Tech's apparent support of higher corporate taxes - Gazettextra

WASHINGTONLina Khan, a progressive champion nominated by President Biden for a key enforcement post, wants to transform antitrust policy into a bulwark against corporate power by blocking more mergers, attacking monopolistic practices and potentially breaking up some of Americas largest companies.

Ms. Khan, 32 years old, is awaiting Senate confirmation for a Democratic seat on the five-member Federal Trade Commission after she was cleared by the Senate Commerce Committee. She has risen to prominenceand gained bipartisan supportas Democrats and Republicans alike have said lax antitrust enforcement, especially in the tech sector, has allowed dominant firms to hobble rivals and stifle competition.

Her targets have included not just Big Tech but also Big Chocolate and others. She has argued for hawkish positions that would overhaul legal doctrine and go well beyond the approach of recent antitrust enforcers. While her most ardent supporters believe such changes are long overdue, her views have prompted a debate on whether her approach is realistic and potentially so sweeping that it could prove jarring to the economy.

Stepped-up antitrust enforcement is one thing, said Howard University law professor Andrew Gavil, who was a top FTC staffer the last time Democrats controlled the commission. Changing the standards is a different matter, he said.

Mr. Gavil, who favors more enforcement, said Ms. Khan will have to consider how to translate her views into something that can be applied in practice. Thats more challenging than simply being a critic on the outside, he said.

Read the original:

Big Tech Adversary Poised to Take Assertive FTC Antitrust Role - The Wall Street Journal

Rising concerns about higher inflation and interest rates are on investors' minds lately, and many are wondering howthiswill affect some of thebiggest technology stocksgoing forward. These companies have been huge winners over the years and benefited greatly from a pandemic-fueled boost in 2020, so investors could very well be taking some profits off the table.

There are some smaller, high-qualitybusinesses, however, that have been beaten down over the past few months for various reasons, but still have solid long-term outlooks. Here are threegrowth stocksthat are on sale right now and are worth taking a look at.

Image source: Getty Images.

With astock price that has fallen 31% since March 1, Etsy(NASDAQ:ETSY), the leading online marketplace for handcrafted and special goods, should be on every investor's watch list.

Thecompany's 4.7 million active sellers and 90.7 million active buyers accounted for $3.1billion of gross merchandise sales in the most recent quarter, an increase of 132% from the prior-year period. Revenue (up 142%) and net income (up 1,048%) have also increased significantly, demonstrating just how valuable the e-commerce platform is.

Management's comments regarding a deceleration of growththisquarter, on the backs of a record-breaking 2020,certainly pressured the stock. A slowdown is to be expected after last year, but Etsy will continue riding the secular shift to online shopping for many years to come.

Etsy empowers and supports local entrepreneurs looking to showcase their products, and it provides consumers access to goods no one else sells. In a 2020 survey, 88%of Etsy buyers agreed that the site had items they can't find anywhere else.

Thebusinesscurrentlyoperatesin the U.S., U.K., Canada, Germany, Australia, France, and India, and its sellersoffereverything from home furnishings and jewelry to craft supplies and beauty products. There is still a massive untapped market opportunity in front of Etsy, supporting growth for a long time.

Peloton Interactive(NASDAQ:PTON) has become somewhat of a household name, but its stock, which has dropped 40% since mid-January, hasfallen out of favorwith Wall Street.

The connected fitness company's business surged during the pandemic (sales soared more than 100% in each of the past four quarters) as people stuck at home searched for ways to work out. But persistent supply chain issues leading to long wait times and delayed deliveries have resulted in irritated consumers.

Further adding to the list of problems is the recent recallof its Tread+ and Tread treadmills. This was after Peloton initially resisted a warning by the Consumer Product Safety Commission that cited numerous injuries and one child death. Not a good public relations showing.

But let's face it. Customers don't just use Peloton's equipment and digital app. They rave about them. The company has a cult-like following primarily due to its easy-to-use software and social connectivity. Peloton makes working out fun, while adding a powerful interactive element to the mix.

Memberchurnin Q3 was an impressive 0.31%, andthe average number of monthly workouts (a measure of engagement) was 26 in the quarter, a record for the company.

Peloton's flagship product, the Peloton bike, is back to pre-pandemicdelivery wait times. The company has already released asoftwareupdatefor its recalled treadmills and is working on a hardware fix to enhance safety. This should ease any shareholder anxiety.

Peloton still has the potential to be a global-scale fitness company. These recent stumbles are just an opportunity to fix mistakes and bolster its competitive positioning.

The streaming wars are in full swing, and no company sits more perfectly in the middle of it all than Roku(NASDAQ:ROKU). The streaming player and platformbusinesscontinues to register solid gains, with revenue and gross profit up 79% and 132%, respectively, in the most recent quarter. Thecompanynow has 53.6millionactive accounts that watched 18.3 billion hours of content in the three-month period.

The stock price has diverged fromthese strong fundamentals. Since Feb. 16, Roku is down 30%, which could be a result of the gradual reopening of the economy that will leave consumers spending less time at home. This is certainly warranted, but management is expecting another blowout quarter coming up, a sign that momentum hasn't slowed yet.

What separates Roku from the streaming service companies you're probably more familiar with is that it actually creates the platform for these content companies to reach viewers, while at the same time providing an avenue for corporations to advertise their products and services on a streaming ecosystem.

Roku is quite literally building the TV operating system of the future. Its platform segment, which is where advertising and subscription revenue is accounted for, sports a rapidly expanding gross margin of nearly 67%.Thisbusinessis on its way to producing profits at scale.

Over time, as more people stop paying for traditional cable-TV subscriptions and move to streaming, Roku stands to benefit immensely. It isestimated that 27% of U.S. households will cut the cord in 2021, providing a powerful and durable tailwind for Roku.

This article represents the opinion of the writer, who may disagree with the official recommendation position of a Motley Fool premium advisory service. Were motley! Questioning an investing thesis -- even one of our own -- helps us all think critically about investing and make decisions that help us become smarter, happier, and richer.

See the article here:

Big Tech Tumbles, But These 3 Growth Stocks Are On Sale Now - Motley Fool

The world's largest game streaming service Twitch said on Wednesday that players will be able to add a transgender label to their videos - a move the company said would aid inclusion among its 30 million daily gamers.

Twitch, which lets users broadcast themselves playing video games, introduced "transgender", "bisexual", "Black," and "disabled" among more than 350 new tags - labels that users can add to their videos.

"This has been one of the most popular requests we've heard, and the simple truth is that we should have done this sooner," Amazon-owned Twitch said in a blog last week.

It then broadcast the news to users on Wednesday.

Tech firms have come under pressure to make their products more inclusive of trans people, with Instagram and LinkedIn allowing users to add their pronouns to profiles, amid fierce debate over what it means to be male or female.

A raft of US states want to bar young, trans Americans from playing school sports or getting medical help, with a record 18 "anti-LGBTQ" state bills signed into law this year, according to advocacy group Human Rights Campaign.

"Adding that trans tag it makes it very, very easy for us to find each other and to connect with each other," Casey, who streams under the username CaseyExplosion and did not want to give her full name, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

"That's something that is vital because for a lot of gaming spaces, if you're LGBT, there's a sort of unspoken, 'Don't ask, don't tell'."

The existing 'LGBTQIA' tag was not specific enough to help trans people easily connect, particularly as it was used by many people who considered themselves 'allies' of the community, said Laura Dale, who streams herself playing Pokemon and Zelda games as LauraKBuzz.

"LGBT is a pretty broad range of identities," she said.

Twitch says about 70 percent of its users are aged 13 to 34. They collectively watch 68 million to 73 million hours of game play each day, according to unofficial data site Twitch Tracker.

Thomson Reuters 2021

Originally posted here:

Twitch Adds 'Transgender' Tag as Big Tech Vies to Be Inclusive - Gadgets 360

Bill Cotterell, Your Turn Published 6:02 a.m. ET May 27, 2021

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Gov. Ron DeSantis did what he needed to do in signing Floridas new Big Tech law, even though the statute fairly shouts its unconstitutionality.

The Constitutions very First Amendment, the cherry on top of the whole Bill of Rights, says the government cant infringe on freedom of the press or freedom of speech. If they could have foreseen Facebook, Twitter and the sewer that so much of social media hasbecome, the Founders probably would have written it differently.

But they didnt.

So as much as we might wish to make those information giants stop de-platforming those whose ideas they find false or dangerous, we cant. Its their platform.

The bill DeSantis signed would impose fines of $250,000 a day on tech giants for removing statewide political candidates from their platforms. The fine would be $25,000 a day for sending a non-statewide candidate to Coventry.

More: GOP-controlled Florida Legislature approves elections overhaul, social media crackdown

Individual users stifled by the companies can sue them, under the law DeSantis signed in Miami on Monday. Users must be notified when their postings are censored or tagged with a warning of false or disputed information.

An odd part of the law provides an exemption for companies owning theme parks like Walt Disney Co., which owns the Disney+ streaming service. A skeptic might wonder why, if the governor and Republican Legislature are so appalled by big-tech censorship and liberal bias on the internet, their solution would exempt Floridas most famous tourism company.

The law could be named for former President Donald Trump, whose exile from Twitter and Facebook sparked cries of censorship and liberal bias in several states with Republican governors and lawmakers. Trumps continuing lies about a rigged 2020 election, and his Jan. 6 performance that prompted many members of his cult to attack the U.S. Capitol, were the basis for his social-media banishment.

DeSantis, who owes his election to Trump, said Facebook, Twitter and the others use secret algorithms and shadow banning to shape debates and control the flow of information. They claim to be neutral a virtual wall on which we can all scrawl a message or paste a poster but they act as the proverbial Big Brother and 2021 looks an awful lot like the fictitious 1984.

Hes right about the need for making the tech giants more responsive. Congress, not the states, should hold them responsible for knowingly and continuously spreading libelous or deliberately hurtful untruths that get posted maliciously.

For example, just last year Trump Tweeted a vile smear about the death of an aide to former Pensacola congressman Joe Scarborough, even though the womans family pleaded with Twitter to stop it.

DeSantis is also right, mostly, about a prevailing liberal bias in what gets quashed online. Funny how that just happens to follow a pattern. But its not governments job to ascribe motives to a decision to block a post or a person, or to decide whether a comment is deleted for partisan reasons.

Long before anyone heard of Facebook or Twitter, Florida set an instructive legal precedent that should apply here. Almost 50 years ago, we had a right to reply law requiring newspapers to print rebuttal essays from candidates they did not endorse on their editorial pages. The Miami Herald refused to run a rebuttal submitted by a spurned legislative candidate, he sued, and the Supreme Courtthrew out the 1913 statute.

The ruling means the press cannot be forced to publish something, any more than it can be forbidden to publish something.

Lawyer DeSantis, if he were serious about combatting cyber-censorship, might have pondered such a precedent before getting his friends in the Legislature to give him the new statute. But his real purpose here is to cater some would say pander to unhappy Trump supporters, whose votes hell need when seeking a second term next year.

Mark Zuckerberg et. al. have plenty of lawyers to brush aside the Florida law, and those popping up in other states. We taxpayers will foot the bill for defending our new statute, but that happens a lot.

When some judges chuck the whole thing, DeSantis can tell Trumps disgruntled followers he tried. That ought to gruntle them.

Cotterell(Photo: Democrat files)

Bill Cotterell is a retired Tallahassee Democrat capitol reporter who writes a twice-weekly column. He can be reached at bcotterell@tallahassee.com.

JOIN THE CONVERSATION

Send letters to the editor (up to 200 words) or Your Turn columns (about 500 words) to letters@tallahassee.com. Please include your address for verification purposes only, and if you send a Your Turn, also include a photo and 1-2 line bio of yourself. You can also submit anonymous Zing!s at Tallahassee.com/Zing.

Submissions are published on a space-available basis. All submissions may be edited for content, clarity and length, and may also be published by any part of the USA TODAY NETWORK.

Never miss a story: Subscribe to the Tallahassee Democrat using the link at the top of the page.

Read or Share this story: https://www.tallahassee.com/story/opinion/2021/05/27/florida-governor-ron-desantis-legislature-cant-win-against-big-tech-facebook-twitter/7436873002/

Read more from the original source:

Florida governor will lose his fight with cyber censors and he knows it | Bill Cotterell - Tallahassee Democrat

Tech hasnt always had a great image when it comes to climate and eco responsibility. If its not data centres sucking up power from the grid, its the environmental impact of global ecommerce, raising emissions as packages are shipped all over the world. Or the mining activity for rare earth minerals scarring the earth, and the growing pile of electronic waste as a testimony to our insatiable appetite for new electronics.

But things are starting to shift. Major companies such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Google are backing initiatives that will cut their environmental impact, making an effort to be seen as environmentally conscious and responsible. Apple plans to be carbon neutral through a series of green energy and recycling initiatives by 2030. Thats the same year Microsoft has targeted to become carbon negative. Amazon, like other tech giants, is turning to green energy to power its data centres, while Google has pledged to use only carbon neutral energy sources by 2030. Amazon owner Jeff Bezos has pledged $10 billion to fight climate change.

Driving this push for sustainability is the growth in awareness at a consumer and investor level about the impact we are having on our environment. Its not only good for corporate consciences; its good for business too.

Karen ORegan. managing director at Accenture, said research by the company has shown 65 per cent of consumers are asking and demanding greater responsibility from companies for driving sustainable action in the future.

Smart companies are the ones who put their consumers at the centre and if you are listening to consumers, that is what you are going to be doing, she said.

However, while companies have been recognising they have responsibilities with regards to sustainability, Covid may have threatened to derail some of the progress made as companies cut costs and scaled back spending in response to the tough business environment.

The pandemic hasnt dampened in any way the importance of sustainability, particularly for consumers, investors and employers, said ORegan.

Particularly at the very beginning [of the pandemic], there was a priority on cost protection and on what companies were doing to get through the next few months. The question was around new investments they were going to make in the area of sustainability and were they going to be able to afford those.

I think as we moved through the pandemic, what became obvious from a lot of the research was that consumer sentiment didnt change. And if anything, it proved consumers were making an increased link between sustainability and the pandemic, and resilience going forward.

So despite the pandemic, the trend for technology to shift towards a greener and more environmentally responsible future is continuing. In March, 24 chief executives of major companies operating in Europe signed a declaration to take action in a number of areas, including to invest in the development and deployment of greener digital technologies and services that are energy and material efficient and to join with NGOs to develop tools to measure the net impact of green digital technologies on the environment

Among the signatories were Microsoft, escooter company Bolt, IBM, Ericsson, Nokia and SAP. The companies also pledged to become carbon neutral by 2040. Microsoft has said that by 2030 it will be taking more carbon out of the air than it emits.

Delivering on those promises will be crucial. Companies are very conscious of being accused of green washing, which is designed to make people believe that companies are doing more than they actually are. It gives a thin veneer of eco responsibility, with little substance to back it up.

Investors have got much smarter in knowing how to measure ESG [environmental, social and corporate governance]. There are lots of ways in which sustainability and the claims you make in the market can be measured, said ORegan. Companies are becoming very fearful of greenwashing. Weve seen a number of organisations called out for that approach. If you go down that route, you can damage your brand very significantly.

The fear of potential backlash and brand damage has held some companies back from engaging in sustainability at all. Theyre afraid of being tarnished with the greenwashing label, said Dr Cara Augustenbourg, environmental policy fellow at University College Dublin.

Where Ive seen success is where there is full transparency across the businesss supply chain; where they recognise there are impacts across the supply chain, from the products they use to build their widget all the way to the retailers they transport the widgets to. And they publish the lifecycle analysis of those impacts in a fully transparent way, and admit imperfection.

Payments company Stripe launched Stripe Climate in 2020, a way for businesses to easily invest in technologies that support climate action, by diverting a fraction of their revenue towards initiatives that permanently remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Initially available to US businesses, it launched the product globally with a beta in January before opening it up more widely in February.

For Stripe, the project was an easy climate win. Businesses running on the platform can back projects with a few clicks. All funds contributed through Stripe Climate will go to the development of carbon removal technologies, with Stripe forgoing any transaction fees on the contributions.

We tried to make it as easy as possible for businesses. Its literally two or three clicks, said Ryan Orbuch, who leads the project at Stripe . For Stripe, the interest in climate responsibility wasnt a new thing. The company originally had been looking into a corporate offset programme, but became more interested in the idea of removing the carbon from the atmosphere altogether. In 2019, it committed to spending $1 million a year to support carbon capture technologies.

The hypothesis was that there was a really significant gap in demand for permanent removal as a whole, said Orbuch. There are some scientists and entrepreneurs working on solutions that could capture CO2 out of the air and permanently store it in a variety of different methods. But those solutions, we hypothesised, were slow to scale, and there were less people working on them than there should be because theres no demand. No one ever said well come out, well pay you what it costs to run your carbon capture machine, to run your new solution and help it scale up.

Orbuch believes carbon capture will play a key role in fighting climate change.

If we want to keep to something like a 1.5-2 degree warming target were going to need to do dramatic emissions reductions across sectors, energy, industry, transportation and so on. But were at a point now where additionally we need to do significant carbon removal, he said.

There are some solutions today that can cover some portion of the problem. But the world does not have the portfolio of solutions that are going to be needed to actually solve this at reasonable cost.

Stripes Climate fund is attempting to stimulate the demand needed to make these solutions scale up and become cheaper. It has so far chosen four companies in which to invest its money, but it plans to expand that further. In March, it opened a new round of applications, the results of which are imminent, and expects to add more each year.

Among the current crop is CarbonCure, which reduces the carbon impact and water footprint of concrete production; Climeworks, which is developing a carbon removal plant in Iceland; Project Vesta, which is boosting investments in research; and Charm Industrial, which has developed a bio-oil sequestration process.

Were really trying to take a portfolio approach with this, said Orbuch.

For Dr Augustenbourg, the climate situation is now urgent and getting people to recognise that is key.

Before Covid, companies werent generally doing enough to meet the Paris climate target of 1.5 degrees. That ambition now has to be ramped up even more, and everybody has to do their fair share to meet that target. That means radical emissions reductions and change in business practices to align with the Paris Agreement and the circular economy.

The problem is that the target is steep. To have even a 66 per cent chance of staying below the 1.5 degree limit we have to reduce emissions by 50 per cent between now and 2030.

Thats the bare minimum, that everyone is trying to halve their emissions by 2030 and move to net zero by 2050, she said.

The definition of sustainability is that it is to allow future generations to avail of the same resources we have today, so its living within the limits to growth, to conserve those natural resources. If we could limit our consumption to the level that those resources are available in 100 years time for future generations, then officially were being sustainable even though we are making an impact.

Originally posted here:

Big tech firms say they are turning green but can they deliver? - The Irish Times

Yesterday afternoon, the phrase #FireMeghanMcCain was trending on Twitter. What terrible, awful thing had she said to warrant trending on Twitter? The co-host of The View had done something few others have: decried an alarming spike in anti-Semitism.

Its not surprising, if youre familiar with Twitter, to see how an outspoken defender of the Jewish people may find herself in its cross hairs. This is a place where variations of the phrase Hitler was right were posted more than 17,000 times (according to the Anti-Defamation League) in just a one-week span in May. As in-person violence against Jews has spiked, so too has hatred against Jews online.

They are not disconnected phenomena, but part of the same ecosystem of hate that has blossomed along with the increase in tensions in the Middle East.

Writing for the Jewish Journal, Pamela Paresky and Alex Goldenberg described some of the research theyve compiled about anti-Semitism online. They wrote, According to the Network Contagion Research Institute (NCRI), where both authors are affiliated, extremist hashtags and slogans are upstream predictors of real-world violence and unrest.

In a disturbing example, the anti-Semitic hashtag #Covid1948 has been trending on Twitter in several countries, including the United States. Often accompanied by nakedly anti-Jewish content, the hashtag likens the birth of the state of Israel in 1948 to the COVID-19 virus. According to the NCRI, the hateful hashtag was shared up to 175 times per minute for over four hours on May 13. It often appears alongside #FreePalestine and is associated with other anti-Semitic hashtags like #Hitlerwasright and #Zionazi.

While weve seen President Donald Trump and countless numbers of his supporters booted off Twitters service, purveyors of Jew hate like Irans Supreme Leader Imam Sayyid Ali Khamenei, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyyeh, and Louis Farrakhan are still regularly posting. Adeel Raja posting in praise of Hitler throughout his time on Twitter finally lost him a gig as a freelance CNN contributor but didnt even warrant a suspension, let alone ban, from the social media service.

Over the last year, weve seen official and viral social media campaigns for Black Lives Matter and Stop Asian Hate. Social media companies and their users stood up to hatred and promoted content designed to stand athwart prejudice. And now with an increase in online and in-person hatred against Jews, were met with silence.

Around the world, weve seen violent attacks on Jews walking down the street, dining at kosher restaurants, at synagogues, and demonstrating in support of Israel. The videos of incendiary devices thrown at Jews standing in the Diamond District or dining outside are jarring and the muted reaction online, with the only vocal response coming almost entirely from the Jewish community, has been perhaps even more alarming than the attacks themselves.

These arent just an isolated set of events with a handful of bigots roaming the streets looking for Jews to target; no, we are witnessing a wholesale abandonment of the Jewish people at the hands of these mobs both in the streets and on the web.

The popularity of these anti-Semitic messages, the silence of social media companies and their users in response to these attacks, and their outrage that someone like Meghan McCain would dare speak up against it speak volumes about our priorities as a society. While we may stand against some forms of hatred, the oldest form, Jew hate, is still fair game.

See the original post:

17,000 tweet 'Hitler was right,' and Big Tech barely reacts - New York Post