Subsidies Don't Help; Punishing Litterbugs Does

While in DC the weekend before last, I was struck by how clean the city is compared to NYC (which itself is much cleaner than it was just a few years ago).

Why is Bloomberg trying to plow hundreds of millions of my tax dollars into a stadium to subsidize some really rich team owners (and thereby subsidize the players, coaches, and everyone on the payroll too)? Oh, that's right -- it's an investment in the city's economy and well being of the community.

To close the loop in this far-flung post (stick with me, I'm not completely insane yet), here's yet another revolutionary concept (though in reality it's simply straightforward):

Start writing tickets for littering in NYC! Use some of those funds earmarked for the stadium to hire cops to punish people for littering and violating my rights by throwing their garbage such that it ends up on my private property (or the streets in front of my private property).

Somehow I think a squeaky clean NYC would do more for city's economy and the community than another subsidy to the very rich. Isn't it ironic (or not) that such protection vs. subsidization is what a capitalist's government is supposed to do?