It is so, so, so much easier to build freeways, roads, and highways than rail systems.
It is also absolutely necessary to have roads to move people and goods as not everyone and everything can be transported on rail or even is near rail (even post-HSR).
This is not really the point. Again, your hypothesis lacks explanatory powers. Virtually all of the works undertaken so far on the "rail" project have been roads: bridges, trenches, and relocations of car stuff. So if California can spend tens of billions every year on car stuff through the caltrans budget, it should be more than capable of moving a few of those dollars over the get the HSR project finished. It's a matter of political leadership.
> It is also an income center. California _makes_ money from spending on roads because of job creation (=tax revenue), taxes on vehicle sales, taxes on fuel, tolls, freight fees, and more: https://www.calbike.org/there-is-no-deficit-in-californias-t...
Please provide a reference for CA making money by building roads. Road building is foundational to other economic activity, but AFAIK, it's not turning a profit (nor should it be expected to). Unfortunately, we have a double standard where we consider public transport to be a failure if it doesn't generate a profit.
It is also absolutely necessary to have roads to move people and goods as not everyone and everything can be transported on rail or even is near rail (even post-HSR).
It is also an income center. California _makes_ money from spending on roads because of job creation (=tax revenue), taxes on vehicle sales, taxes on fuel, tolls, freight fees, and more: https://www.calbike.org/there-is-no-deficit-in-californias-t...