Dear editor:
I do not agree with the letter writer that is opposed to the $1.7 billion tax break for for Shell to build a plant in northwestern (sic) Pa. The letter writer starts her opposition justification by citing Shell's CEO salary structure. She then cites Shell's profits. Her logic is that if Shell can pay their leadership this amount and if Shell makes large profits, then they either don't need or deserve tax incentives to locate the plant in Pennsylvania.
The general location of this plant is a fit to be in the liquids rich area of the Marcelleus shale, i.e. southwest Pennsylvania, eastern Ohio or the panhandle of West Virginia. Any of these locations works from a logistics perspective. The Governor of Pennsylvania is doing his job by incentivizing Shell to locate in Pennsylvania and create Pennsylvania jobs, hire people that pay Pennsylvania taxes and help local businesses that pay Pennsylvania taxes. We should support the Goveror's efforts to try and get Shell to locate this plant in our commonwealth. Too often government is criticized for not doing enough to get business to locate in our area.
Let's quit worrying about how much money Shell is making and how much their executives are paid. This is not going to change if the plant is located in Ohio. We need to ask "Are Pennsylvania residents better off (even after the tax incentives) if the plant is located in Pennsylvania?"
Fred Martin, Jr.
Warren