Wouldn't you prefer private sector jobs?

If a high-speed rail system is to be financed by taxpayers, the taxpayers will be justified in expecting a decent return on their "investment".  Thus, the rail will need to be heavily used and perceived as an worthwhile asset, and management of the system will need to be a whole lot better than history has shown.  That's going to be a hard sell.

Keynesian economic policies(theories) are justified as "economy boosting" by some, but this isn't without a lot of debate.  Along with national construction projects, many national alternative energy projects rely on aspects of this theory while there are many who consider this to be detrimental to the economy.

If there were a real consumer demand for a high-speed rail, capitalists would have appeared to fill that need.  That is the best way to go.  It's worse to impose busy-work on the taxpayer.  It's also worse to encourage "fake capitalists" that are eager to join in and play along in government programs.

It's also a hard sell that increasing government jobs grows the economy better than increasing private sector jobs.  Which would you prefer?

Henry Davis