Is this like the Hoover dam but with 100x longer environmental reviews and 10x more expensive due to special interest grifts that then cripple the investment before it fails 10yrs later? And the only people who made money were a bunch of private consultants hired by the government to do the reviews and executive staff the pseudo-market company behind it?

I haven't heard of a single major infrastructure project that hasn't followed that trajectory. Reading about Obama's two solar projects are a good starting point. But nothing beats Keystone XL.

It's no wonder it hasn't happened and it's not for lack of trying or tax dollars being spent. Even here in Canada it's the same story every time and we have a far more receptive political base for spending the tax money. So I'll never be convinced that's the real hurdle.

That had positive effects in the USA, but in Europe the economic woes of the 1930s led to WWII.

Right now we can't for a very similar reason that we couldn't prior to 1933.

But there's an election this year, so that can change.

> Hoover Dam Mark 2 sounds good to me.

Hoover Dam actually wasn't an infrastructure jobs program to counteract the downturn, it was planned and approved before the 1929 crash and subsequent Depression.