Share This Page

Pittsburgh Tuesday takes

| Monday, Sept. 16, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

A public subsidy?: Downtown grocery stores have been a tough sell in Pittsburgh for decades. Hopes are high for a new one — off Market Square in the Thompson Building — because Downtown living has increased. Those in the know say an ancillary increase in foot traffic will be the key to the store's success. It's expected to open as early as next spring. But if there's so much optimism for success, why might half of the store's $500,000 in development costs be borne by taxpayers?

VA's cozy coterie: A Trib investigation has documented the incestuous relationship between former Veterans Affairs executives who are hired by their old bosses to perform pricey “consulting” work. And we're talking about contracts in the millions of dollars. It's the kind of behavior that forces the public to conclude that the VA doesn't work for the benefit of vets but for the benefit of its own muckety-mucks.

Spare the tongue, too?: A new Pitt study, published in the journal Child Development, suggests that harsh verbal discipline of 13- and 14-year-old kids can lead to, among other things, self-esteem problems. “Indeed, harsh verbal discipline appears to be detrimental in all circumstances,” says Pitt researcher Ming-Te Wang. Of course, one researcher's “verbal abuse” of an adolescent is another parent's wake-up call to a young teen in desperate need of a reality check. Wussifying discipline will only create greater problems.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.