[concordDance]

Let's say I work in reinsurance. How many reinsurance companies do you think are within walking distance?

It's an odd fact of life that as countries get more developed the people in them more heavily specialise. This is one of the reasons cities have much higher wealth production per capita than towns.

If everyone is very unspecialized (e.g. "general practitioner" rather than "expert in non-hodgkins limphomas") then walking and biking could work okay, there should be a couple of jobs in range (having alternative employment options is vital for healthy employee-employer relations). But that's just not how an advanced global economy works.

[david-gpu]

Somehow most developed countries around the world have figured out how to design cities around walking, public transit and cycling, but it's an insurmountable problem in the US?

It's not magic, folks, just look at how it is done elsewhere. Yes, that includes places with "real winters".

[concordDance]

Uh, I live in the UK. Public transport is only good when compared to cars in 5mph traffic in roads not designed for that many cars.

Say I live in Benson and want to get to the Oxford Science Park for work. Do I go for a walk and two busses at 1 hour or do I drive for 12 minutes?

[david-gpu]

The majority of people do not choose to live in one town and commute to work to a different one that doesn't have a good transit connection with the first.

The solution sure isn't providing even more infrastructure to the method of transport that is least efficient (passengers/hr, ongoing cost, space wasted for parking), most polluting (particulate, noise) and most dangerous to others (injuries per Km travelled).

People constantly defend cars based on how convenient it is for the person driving them without taking into consideration how their choice affects everybody outside their car. This method of transport is unique in the magnitude of its externalities compared to the alternatives.