Not sure, but here in Japan, they're spending USD$67.3k per foot (290km at USD$64B according to the latest news report I could find which reported a big cost ov

Not sure, but here in Japan, they're spending USD$67.3k per foot (290km at USD$64B according to the latest news report I could find which reported a big cost overrun) for the new Chuo Shinkansen bullet train line between Tokyo and Nagoya. However, there's some big differences: this new line is going to be a 500km/h maglev line with a ~50-minute travel time, not a normal rail line like California's, and 90% of it is underground since there's a bunch of mountains in the way. Somehow, America these days always manages to spend absurd amounts of money on infrastructure, far more than peer nations. Another big factor is profitability: will California's system actually pay for itself? The shinkansen bullet trains in Japan are profitable, and have been for a long time. During a normal day, one train leaves Tokyo station every few minutes on the Tokaido line towards Nagoya and Osaka. So while the new maglev train looks horrifically expensive for initial costs, with the huge ridership the existing trains already have, it's a very sound investment and is sure to be profitable before too long because Japanese are used to taking trains for traveling between cities. I can't say the same for Americans, especially when this California line is taking some long, meandering route to a bunch of unimportant towns instead of just going straight from LA to SanFran like it should, which means it won't even be that fast.