[jstarfish]

> I will suggest they can pick it up if it bothers them so much, let alone out of a sense civic pride [...] I just don't get it...

It's actually really simple.

Imagine you have a co-worker that doesn't do their job. You complain about it and are told "well, you have time enough to complain, maybe you could take on some of his tasks." Now you're doing the job of two people and the colleague continues avoiding accountability for his incompetence.

It's bully logic. The problem isn't that I'm punching you, it's that you're being too loud in crying about it.

Burdening critics with extra work is not the solution to upstream problems. The problem is people littering, not a lack of people willing to pick it up.

[jerf]

This is like the opposite of the Tragedy of the Commons. If everyone in your neighborhood pitches in and picks up trash, it will be clean. If nobody does, it will inevitably decay. Doesn't even have to be littering; things blow in, accidents happen, trash blows away, stuff happens.

The residents of your neighborhood will collectively decide what kind of neighborhood they live in by the actions they take. Whether you find this morally offensive, morally harmonious, or some complicated other combination doesn't affect the brute fact of the matter.

[droopyEyelids]

Your logic is flawless, the problem is that you're using it to come up with a reason why not to clean up the yard/neighborhood/etc.

This means things don't improve!

[jstarfish]

Thanks, but nothing I said should lead to that conclusion. There will always be incidental debris. It helps when more than just a handful of people bother to clean it up. It also helps when people don't deliberately add to their workload.