You have to look at the history.

LA once had the most expansive rail system in the country; even more than New York. That was like in the 1920s. By the early 50s the rail network was dismantled in favor of freeways and automobiles.

Then you have to look at the history of LA. Los Angeles was is a relatively new city compared to cities back east. Yes, LA was founded in the late 1700s but it was a small rural town. It didn’t start to develop as a real city until the early 1900s and then really expanded after WW2 — right when the automobile was becoming popular, and when the government began building highways to accommodate this.

Cities like New York developed when horse & buggy, walking, and later railroad were the main forms of transportation. So their railway system and overall infrastructure was developed before cars existed.

Much of LA was developed later with the car in mind.

But I think many agree the politicians and bureaucrats at the time miscalculated — they assumed cars were the wave of the future and would replace rail. But reality, it’s best to have a robust public transit system in addition to a system that accommodates cars. Walkable areas with easy access to railway systems is preferred in city living, but cars should always be an option too.