As alluded to by another comment below, having even a small specialized workforce trained and skilled in building rail is something that's desireable. Maybe ev

As alluded to by another comment below, having even a small specialized workforce trained and skilled in building rail is something that's desireable. Maybe even a topic of national security (or at least national competence). However, people need practice and real projects to stay skilled. And if a country only has 1 major rail project every 30 years, you're not going to be able to maintain that workforce or national skill -- unless that workforce finds projects outside the country to work on. (Or attract people to that field. Maintenance alone is not very interesting to many people.) It becomes a very boom/bust talent pool that loses its sharpness because of lack of wood to chop. I think advanced countries will find these kinds of skills (rail being just an example) attritting to developing countries like China, India where growth means that 10,000 rail-specific engineers have places to practice their skills on real projects that keep on coming. They stamp out an elevated rail bridge every month. First you see the expertise moving to the private sector because government no longer engages in the building of infrastructure. Then even the private sector talent moves overseas to follow the projects. Even an org like Parsons almost cannot compete with this. And that's why you see rail projects going to such countries' companies as top bidders possessing the necessary expertise -- ready to go right now, rather than taking 1 year to even find the people. Talent and ability follows the need (and money) for it.