If it's this simple why aren't other companies entering the market offering steep discounts? I don't see how such an arbitrary and vast margin could be sustained in the presence of even minimal competition.

In LA rail projects generally go to one contractor not because they are the cheapest (they aren’t), but because officials like that they worked on the previous project and have ‘experience.’ AKA nepotism and corruption.

LA rail is actually much more cost effective than other US cities. There was going to be a federal study why, but it was cancelled.

>> but it was cancelled

Ironically making it even more cost effective.

Federal study I wouldn't think would come out of LA's budget or federal allocation to that budget?

Probably the paperwork involved.