The fact that cars mathematically cannot scale with population is “so very minor”? Or that cars are the most expensive form of transportation? Or that cars require tons of parking and wide roads that lead to inefficient use of land, contributing to a housing crisis and ugly sprawl?

So what is a “major” problem? Ah right, walking a few blocks.

[–] EvokerKing@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Cars scale with the population very well. Rural and small cities have smaller roads and better infrastructure for traveling short distances while still being able to be used for long distance. The housing crisis goes a lot deeper than people think, if cars are contributing, then not much.

Ah right because America is a few blocks long. And here I thought the American would be bad at geography (I don't know a single thing about geography).

[–] SkepticalButOpenMinded@lemmy.ca 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

No urban designer or transportation expert thinks that cars scale with population. Talking about rural and small cities is the opposite of scaling with population. Car dependent big cities like LA or Houston have hellish traffic.

At least have a cursory look at the link I posted in my last comment. Cars play a huge role in bad land use. This is why they have an enormous effect on housing supply.

You seem to be lost. You made the point that walking from a train station to your final destination was some major problem. I’m not even sure what point you think your last paragraph is responding to. Yes America is bigger than a few blocks. So is Europe and China. So what?

[–] EvokerKing@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

So I'm not walking that far...