get your facts right
In countries like Greece, Italy, and Brazil, large infrastructure projects are funded differently than they are in the United States. Despite the financial crisis in Greece, infrastructure proposals are popping up like crazy. The only thing delaying them is bureaucratic red tape (which is a big problem in Brazil, Italy, and Greece). Much of the funds for infrastructure projects in these countries comes from quasi-governmental investment banks, that receive a return for their investment, such as the European Investment Bank, and Brazil's Economic and Development Bank. Projects may also be partly funded by private capital.
By contrast, projects in the United States are not funded from dedicated sustainable funds, but rather have to compete with [massive] military spending as well as social welfare (social security, medicare, etc) from a general taxpayers' pool. And infrastructure projects are not chosen based on their worthiness by an independent investment bank that does cost-analysis, but are rather chosen for political reasons. For example, an HSR line from Boston to Washington -even though it would be a highly worthy project, with returns on investment- is shunned because of pressure on Congress from the oil lobbies.
Americans aren't so smart for shunning high-speed rail. The US economy is heavily dependent on military Keynesianism, which chest-thumping conservatives would never do without.
