There are a huge range of issues to discuss here, so I can't deal with any in detail. Can I pick up pn one or two though.
First, the issue of subsidies themselves. I will see if I can track down any information on subsidies from the French and German governments, and post later. There seems to be a view here though that the subsidy issue is polarised:
1. Airbus gets launch aid subsidies direct from governments
2. Boeing gets subsidies in the form of military and R&D.
It is just not this simple. Airbus / EADS for example also gets R&D contracts, and also obtains military orders that can. if they so wish, cross-subsidise commercial operations. On the other hand, Boeing gets direct commercial subsidies. The link that supercarb posted lists the following subsidies for the launch of the 7E7:
State of Washington $3,200m Final Assembly Production
State of Kansas $200m Nose and Cockpit Interest Free Bond
Japanese Government $1,588m Wing and Fuselage Production Subsidy
Italian Government $590m Rear Fuselage Production Subsidy
747 Special Freighters $500m Production Transport Production Subsidy
7e7 Rail Barge $16m Production Transport Production Subsidy
Second, I am not sure why Galileo is figuring so prominantly in this discussion. Galileo is important because at the moment all global positioning is based upon a single system whose primary raison d'etre is military. Dubyaq could chose to, for example, switch back on SA at 24 hrs notice (as Clinton did when he switched it off). This makes users of the sytstem very vulnerable.
How the EU chooses to develop this is up to them surely? If it is 100% subsidised, and made free to users then I would have thought that this would be a good thing. If it is developed on a commercial model (which is the favoured option), in which the EU pays the initial costs then a commercial operator takes over and charges a commission on the chip-sets then that is OK too so long as use is not compulsory (and that is certainly not a serious intention). Given that the only competitor is 100% subsidised, neither seem to be too outrageous to me. Either way, the situation is so different to that of Airbus and Boeing I don't really see the point of the comparison.
For the record I am an academic who runs a research team focused upon measuring the surface of the earth using laser and satellite technologies. GPS has serious limitations for us, especially the SA issue.
Dr Dave