[extr]

You're welcome to feel that way but it's a luxury belief. In reality, outside of a few (one?) major city in the US with public transportation infrastructure, you need a car. 92% of people own a car, higher if you exclude the dense urban areas I'm talking about.

[runarberg]

Car ownership is lowest in the lowest income brackets, and public transit ridership is highest among the lower income brackets. I really don‘t understand how you can reach your conclusion that not driving is a luxury. Data would suggest the exact opposite.

EDIT: To clarify on the public transit usage. The data is by-modal. Lower income levels are by far more likely to use road based public transit (such as busses), but high earners are more likely to live near a rail station and use rail based transit: https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/public-transit-access-and-inc...

[dpatterbee]

People only need cars because people have cars and cars make cities worse for everyone outside of one. If nobody owned cars everyone would get by just fine. It's a race to the bottom.

[satvikpendem]

Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that today people need cars. In an ideal world I'd also love a European or Asian city model but American cities are not like that.

[runarberg]

Most American cities have decent enough public transit where it is viable (or even a preferable) alternative to driving. I can think of Seattle, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, etc. Not every city in America is like El Paso or Phoenix. But even in cities like El Paso or Phoenix, the hostility towards public transit is a political choice and an alternative policy is available if politicians want it.

I my self live close to the good American cities and even though my community is rather rural (I literally live across the street from a dairy farm) I still prefer biking to town. And when I go to the city, I rarely bring my car with me, as I prefer the bus over waiting in the ferry line and dealing with parking in the city.