I don't think we want to be a community that shares content like this.
I agree that this post is ethically dubious, but at the same time we actively bypass the paywall anyway.
Whatever, the same news is available elsewhere anyway. The Web button does that too.
Sometimes searching the title in Google works, sometimes it does not.
I'm really against paywalls because it is discrimination against the poor. It is like having a pay bathroom.
There could be couple of reasons why instinctively we think about paying for bread as a mutually beneficial exchange of goods for money, and about paying for internet articles as a "paywall that discriminates the poor":
(a) Articles used to be free, and many (in other publications) are still free.
(b) There is a very little incremental cost to WSJ if a single article will be read for free by someone, as opposed to the supermarket example above where an incremental loaf of bread has a very real economic cost.
But that doesn't change the fact the WSJ article is a real good that cost a lot of money to produce and therefore should be paid for.
edit: grammar