Great job. Now you'll have to figure out what to do when those making insulin decide to take those resources and allocate them to producing something far more profitable.
I enjoy reading articles about science and research and it doesn't matter what the authors sex or race is. Once I start feeling like I'm being preached to however it makes it much more difficult to enjoy the actual story.
There's nothing in this call that rises remotely to the level of anything criminal. I still remember Obama patting Medvedev on the knee and telling him that he will have more leeway after the election to do as he pleases, and Medvedev replying that he will forward this message to Putin... THAT wasn't criminal, but this phone call is?
I didn't vote for Trump last time but I will this time, not because I like him, but as a warning to any party that thinks its more important to win than to improve the USA.
"Or should be compelled to pay double time for anything over 40 hours."
What about all of the people who want to stay over 40h? In my industry that's the large majority of people. An employer would much rather hire a few extra people and cut everyone's hours than to allow people to stay for overtime.
"Smith didn’t dispute any specific details of the article in his statement"
This is factually incorrect.
Here are some direct rebuttals:
NY times allegation: "In the 2017 fiscal year, FedEx owed more than $1.5 billion in taxes. The next year, it owed nothing. "
FedEx rebuttal: "FedEx has paid federal income tax every year, including fiscal year 2018."
NY Times allegation:" FedEx reaped big savings, bringing its effective tax rate from 34 percent in fiscal year 2017 to less than zero in fiscal year 2018, meaning that, overall, the government technically owed it money. But it did not increase investment in new equipment and other assets in the fiscal year that followed, as Mr. Smith said businesses like his would."
FedEx rebuttal: "Following passage of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), FedEx invested billions in capital items eligible for accelerated depreciation and made large contributions to our employee pension plans"
Etc, etc, etc... These are literally the first few sentences from BOTH the article and the response. Either you're being intellectually dishonest by claiming that they didn't dispute and specific details or you're incompetent.
It's silly and serves no purpose other then allowing you to generate some clickbait-y titles.