It's bad enough when government discriminates against some taxpayers by giving subsidies to specific retailers in the hopes of "economic development." But what do you say when government plans to lavish yet another set of gifts on the same company?

The Allegheny Institute has a commentary (PDF) on Dick's Sporting Goods, which is asking for taxpayer support even as it shirks its responsibilities arising from a previous taxpayer subsidy:

Dick's Sporting Goods has announced plans to move from its current headquarters location to another site near Pittsburgh International Airport to accommodate a growing need for space. This will be the company's second move since 2003--the last move, and a subsequent expansion, was done with the funding from state and local taxpayers. But as they contemplate yet another move, will any of the earlier aid be recoverable and will the firm seek even more dollars for this latest relocation?