Unfortunately, the news story “County, city leaders urge removal of Wilson Center court-appointed receiver” tells us all we need to know about the political situation in Pittsburgh.
Several dollar amounts are associated in the story with the August Wilson Center, including “The $40 million center,” “owes nearly $10 million,” “spent $20 million” and “taxpayers spent $17.4 million.” However, the biggest wailing and gnashing of teeth noted in the story is about what we are supposed to believe is an overly generous bid of $4 million for the property by various benefactors. This bargain-basement offer (and subsequent fleecing of “evil” creditors) is justified by the city's noble leaders by recategorizing this mismanaged and underfunded project a “public asset.”
Spare us the socialist twaddle.
If this is the kind of return on investment to be expected within the city limits, I predict fewer and smaller development projects in the public's future. And fewer suckers. For the time being, at least, “Pittsburgh” isn't spelled “D-e-t-r-o-i-t.”
Samuel L Shollenberger
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.