ShareThis Page
Already paying more |

Already paying more

| Friday, January 10, 2014 8:57 p.m

There was speculation concerning the lifting of the cap on the state tax on the wholesale price of motor fuel: Would this action bring an increase in the pump price? Ask a silly question, get a silly answer. Of course it would, and if you hadn’t noticed it already, take a look at the pump price at any nearby gas station/convenience store. Prices have gone up, one might say, with a vengeance.

In his letter on Pennsylvania’s new transportation funding law, “Paying for roads” , John McCaskie, who describes himself as a civil engineer involved in road construction projects for many years, defends the legislation as something that needed to be done. He also criticizes “economic development” in New Stanton, claiming that it made difficult or impossible the construction of proper road junctions there. This might be true.

My background is mechanical rather than civil engineering, but regarding this “economic development,” one assumes the phrase would be “poorly done economic development.” Some sort of permits were required, weren’t they? Who provided the necessary permits? Maybe the same mob that made such a cock-up of highway legislation in Pennsylvania in the past.

Alan Schultz


Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.