it is used every year by more than 160,000 customers to and from Paris-Charles de Gaulle and Paris-Orly airports.

You're touting a service that averages less than 220 users per airport per day. At the hubs of France.

Then you say the idea of SF-LA HSR is laughable, when it is the exact same concept successfully deployed all over Europe. And Asia. And the Northeast Corridor. Competing with air for trips under 3 hours. The concept wasn't the problem, it was the bloated and corrupt execution.

Burbank airport serves many states across the country. New York, Nashville, Chicago, Austin, Dallas, Houston, and all the western states. And one stop connections to anywhere.

There is no downtown to downtown tunnel vision. The plan from the beginning was Sacramento and San Francisco to Orange County and the Inland Empire and San Dieg. The initial LA segment goes to Anaheim. Suburban stops have always been planned.

LAX wasn't included because it would be very expensive to reach. And it wouldn't feed many passengers compared to the other lines. Cost versus benefit. Airport lines are not high priority for many countries. See Madrid. In the right location it can be a decent station. See the Netherlands. And Burbank. LAX is the sort of project that gets built in the second or third phase after a country's basic network is built.