[forrestthewoods]

> Why do they have to be federal funds?

Federal/state/local tax revenue is split about 54/27/19. The US federal deficit is another 19% on-top of that.

For whatever reasons, good or bad, the US funnels tax dollars through the Federal level. They're basically a middle man. Which means large projects almost always require some Federal funding.

[bradleyjg]

27 + 19 is 46%, that’s hardly nothing. Again if you compare other countries a lot of places do a lot more with less. It’s governance issue, not a resource issue.

[forrestthewoods]

Local funding mostly goes to schools. I'm not sure about state funding. Most of the "flex" is at the Federal level. Especially given the fact they can spend money that is literally just printed. Local and State have to pass laws and collect revenue.

The fact of the matter is that our current tax structure relies on the federal pool for infrastructure spending. That's just the way it is. Whether you like it or not. Personally I'd love Fed tax dollars shift more directly to state and local. That would be one plausible path to help achieve "better governance".

> Again if you compare other countries a lot of places do a lot more with less.

Everything in the US is radically overpriced for a lot of reasons. We spend more on health care per capita and don't even get universal coverage out of it. It's embarrassing.