>Meanwhile the argument in opposition says that they were lying about the cost- instead of the $20 billion proponents were promising (they rounded up, of course

>Meanwhile the argument in opposition says that they were lying about the cost- instead of the $20 billion proponents were promising (they rounded up, of course, and assumed 1:1 federal matching funds), it would likely cost $90 billion, according to the opponents, which would make it “the most expensive railroad in history”. This is a rare situation where participants in a public debate understated their argument. In fact, the full cost of the train, according to the Los Angeles Times this past February, is now over $100 billion! Even the initiative’s opponents underestimated what a boondoggle this was! One thing you don't see clarified very often when talking about the costs of megaprojects is inflation. $90 billion in 2008 dollars is $114 billion in 2021 dollars, meaning that the apparent cost blow out (against the opposition estimate) could just be an inflation induced illusion.