And how much in yearly federal subsidies is it going to cost to provide security along the entire length of this 186 MPH track?
The necessity for subsidies diminish as passenger rail infrastructure is upgraded to provide competitive performance and ridership increases past the break-even point.
And where in the world does this occur? No where. Not in England, Japan, Germany, France are passenger trains net cash producing, tax paying entities. Not even in Japan where the government crushes car ownership.
( Actually, I have to point out that China seems, although unclearly, to allow train lines to fail. So, it seems, a bit, that China is more free enterprise, at least in passenger trains, then the rest of the now socialists world. )
No it doesn't. You are ignoring centuries of evidence that proves exactly the opposite happens. By it's very nature anything that is subsidized becomes less competitive and more costly. You are ignoring the fact that government will seize ever increasing amounts of land and resources to build the infrastructure without regard to what it could or would have been used for by the private sector.
The construction of such rail system will benefit the unionized DemonRAT voting construction workers at a cost of 4 to 5 times what taxpaying private sector workers would cost.
Then the operation of said rail system will be carried out by subsidized unionized employees that will cost 4 to 5 times what private sector workers would cost.
This is all to benefit the very limited number of people that commute along a narrow corridor.
Even before the initial construction is complete there will be additional taxes required to support improvements and repairs.
Every aspect of anything subsidized by the government will take away from efficient use of capital and resources that would have been invested elsewhere more productively.
This is a typical socialist program, from the many, for the few.