The true difference is that France has a more centralized decision making system. Its government is unitary, not federal, so local interests are weaker. Interest groups don’t compete with one another as in the US, but instead sort into tripartite negotiations among business, labor, and government. This is similar to Japan, which was a leader in HSR as well.

Note that Germany and Canada, which have parliamentary governments but strong regionalism and interest groups, have not been able to build anything like the TGV or Shinkansen. Germany has a longstanding tradition of commitment to rail services, but its emphasis on strong states has compelled it to spread its HSR money thin. Its ICE system serves more corridors than the TGV, but each corridor gets less money, so the trains usually run on legacy track and only reach 250-270 km/h, rather than 300-320 as in France.

Of course, German rail is far better than American rail. This shows that even within a fragmented political system, it’s possible to have reasonable HSR. I’d say the main difference between the US and Germany is that the US is more averse to the public works spending required to create competitive passenger rail. This is why Switzerland, whose political system is extremely fragmented, has top-notch rail, while the English-speaking world, including not only federal countries like the US and Canada but also unitary Britain, does not.

- From 1986 to 1988, when the legislature was controlled by the right, even though the Presidency remained in the hands of Socialist François Mitterand
- From 1993 to 1995, when the legislature was controlled by the right, even though the Presidency remained in the hands of Socialist François Mitterand
- From 1997 to 2002, when the legislature was controlled by the left, even though the Presidency remained in the hands of conservative Jacques Chirac.

In each of these periods, the Prime Minister became the de facto leader of the nation, not the President, who does not have veto power in France. Recent changes in election dates (as well as the reduction of the President’s term from 7 to 5 years) have made cohabitation less likely than before.

Also, Paris became capital of France precisely because it was the largest city. If the US had kept the capital in New York, instead of building DC to appease the South, you could say the same thing about the US.

This was a great piece on comparative financing. I am personally of the belief that the parliamentary form of government is really at the root of the superior financing history. And, that same difference in their form of government has kept Paris an independent political base in national government. With regards to urban political power France is really a “bizarro” universe (obligato to Superman). The rich live in the center of Paris, the working class and the poor in very high density complexes in the suburbs (periphery).

Look at our nations capital for example, entirely castrated politically, ghettoized no control of anything. Paris is the capitol of France and the political leader, and the biggest city with almost complete control of its own destiny with regards to authoritative allocation of values and resources. United Europe only made it more so.