In the 2000s the Chilean state railway company was involved in a huge corruption scandal as well as bad administrative practices. It’s been slowly recovering, but rail services in Chile still leave a lot to be desired.
Whatever for? As TFA notes the vast majority of Chileans live in the middle, in or near Santiago.
Except that the people are not spread that far out that it makes economical sense.
That sounds like the kind of investment in the commons that a socialist would make. In 1973 the US encouraged a coup to ensure that no such investments were made (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta...). Instead, we applied guns to the affected area and ensured that they would part with their resources as "fair free-market prices" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Boys). They've started the process of removing those policies, but only in the last few years.
If I had to come up with an excuse for not having trains, I'd chose that.
That's why Chile is the most successful economy on the continent.
Objectively false: under the dictatorship half a country lived in extreme poverty, while the economic growth happened with the reforms of the democratic governments in the 1990-2000s.
Anything else is military coup laundering.
I won't try to speak for the Chileans, but while I was there I did not get the feeling that they are happy about the intervention. The more I learned about my country's role in their history, the more surprised I was that they were being so nice to me. (I was there, along with my naiveté, to see a solar eclipse, so the cultural stuff I picked up along the way was a bit of a surprise).
The country is still polarized to some extent so YMMV, depending on who you spoke with.