ShareThis Page
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Nature will decide county's fate

| Monday, March 12, 2018, 9:00 p.m.

The Feb. 18 “Quotables” section poses an interesting question: Is it necessary that a community grow? Or should nature be allowed to take its own course?

Pittsburgh proper's population fell from a high of 676,000 in 1950 to a current estimate of just over 300,000. Is the city less livable today than it was in 1950? California's population has swelled to over 40 million. Is California a better place to live today than it was in 1950? I believe the answers are “no.” Pittsburgh was rated a best place to live just a couple of years ago. California is on the verge of bankruptcy. Its school systems, highway systems, housing prices and other quality-of-life measures suggest eventual self-destruction.

My point is, certain local public officials are overreacting to the population decline. They fail to cite that the western portion of Westmoreland County (Penn and North Huntington townships and Murrysville) is doing quite well. It's the former coal- and steel-dependent and agricultural regions that have fallen behind. In time, these communities will become what they will become. Government can do some things to promote growth or community development, but the essential thrust will come from people with entrepreneurial drive and instincts.

The idea of increasing diversity, suggested by county Commissioner Ted Kopas in an earlier article, is off the mark. Generally, people follow jobs; jobs don't follow people. However, I'm glad the commissioner is on top of the subject. At least continued discussion could produce new ideas or even encourage entrepreneurs to look at the county and appreciate its assets and opportunities. However, in the end, nature will take its natural course.

Louis F. D'Emilio

Irwin

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.

click me