It might be ironic either way (irony is inherently subjective), but as irony is based on contrast between reality and expectations and expectations of the results of an "action taken because I don't have any money" and those of an "action taken because, independent of how much money I have, I am legally prohibited to spend it except for certain narrowly-prescribed purposes, none of which is 'efficiency'" are different in ways which, at least arguably, are relevant to whether or not "this action results, in net, in greater costs for less benefits" conflicts with them.