People are oblivious to the fact that there was a huge and intricate interurban rail system in the east, midwest and west, since the time of the Civil War, and before, and its contribution to the growth of the US is immeasurable.
And it really didn't start to atrophy until after WW2.
And government subsidies, in one form or another, have existed from the time of the Eire Canal, and before, for various transportation projects.
Can you imagine what it would cost to fly, if the ticket actually represented the costs of the airport, the FAA, the air traffic control system, the costs of training pilots, etc.
I would add that much of the Canadian identity is tied up in the not-so-trivial task of uniting Canada's remote towns with the Canadian Pacific in the nineteenth century.
And it really didn't start to atrophy until after WW2.
The railroad industry has nothing to complain about, since they were one of the earliest beneficiaries of government largesse in the transportation industry. The government has simply decided to subsidize someone else these days.
Canada actually has an interesting history as far as the railroad is concerned. British Columbia refused to join the Canadian confederation in the 1860s until the Canadian government promised to connect the province to the rest of the country via the railroad.
The cost of training pilots is already in there. The airlines also pay the airports for gate access and landing fees. These are also already in your ticket, although I have no idea if the costs truly reflect what it costs to run the airpot. Even if I were to concede that air travel costs would go up if the whole system were privatised, I do not have a problem with that. There is no reason why non-fliers should subsidize fliers, particularly since fliers are on average wealthier than non-fliers.