> are not these types of projects funded by a combination
> of federal, state and private funding?
Um, you have noticed that, uh, most states are, uh, broke?
California is on the verge of default. The voters approved a $10B bond measure for HSR, but who will buy these bonds?
> I am not a big fan of privatization, but semi-private transit
> ventures can operate in a decent fashion, judging from EU
> examples (e.g. Eurostoar) ...
Only in the UK is Eurostar in some sense not-public (both the French and Belgian sections are wholly owned by their respective national railroads), and of course it's the part of the system that was latest to the party (HS#1 didn't come on line until the end of 2007, some 13 years after the first trains went through the Chunnel?) and the part that has been repeatedly bailed out -- to the point where the current structure is clearly public.
> there is plenty of idle private capital in need of parking. Why
> not parking it in socially useful ventures?
I'm not sure we disagree as to the usefulness of high speed rail in the US; my point was that if Obama was serious about it, he'd allocate $80B, not $8B. The private sector is lousy at this kind of thing.
/jordan