No, I agree it's not binary. But in a world of finite funding, I cannot help but think the state could be using it in ways that would improve more peoples lives.

I'm not talking about things like "lets fix poverty!", but concrete expenses like the ones I've mentioned.

It's not like the opportunity for recreation doesn't already exist. And it's not like most people who would be using this trail extension don't already have the means to access either of the trails it's connecting. Sure, maybe a few, but is that number of people outweighed by the number who would benefit from some of the other things I talked about? I doubt it.

It's nice to have nice things, but my point is, we already have a lot of nice things. Maybe we should focus on having some more things that actually matter.