Those who live in developments explicitly planned to leverage the fact that people have cars to spread them out further and give each family more land/house for the same money.

In these places, everyone who matters politically has a car, everywhere they want to go has parking, roads are huge, etc. so there is no political will for expensive transit, and the surface area is too large to cover effectively with cheap transit.

In my district (and all the districts around me) there is no busing for high-school students. So for the students that don't drive (Which would account for probably more then half the school), parents or someone else has to drive them.

And no public bus either I assume? I always took public transport to school, but I know that's highly dependant on where you live.

Public busing in the US is awful in most cities. In the suburbs it's basically just to downtown and from downtown.

I didn't say busing for students, I meant take a bus with everyone else.

There's only one district I know of, of the ones which don't offer busing for high-school students, which has a public bus that goes to the high-school. My district in particular doesn't have any public buses that go to the high-school.

I took a tram to college. It went to downtown, not the campus, so I walked the rest of the way.

It's not ideal, but I didn't have my parents drive me (I didn't have a car). I don't see why high school students can't do this.

What exactly are you proposing high-school students in my district do?

Perhaps I should have clarified, there are no buses/trams/subways or any type of public transportation in my school district for high-school students to take, because there is no public transportation period in my city. The only options for going to school are walk, ride a bike, or drive, and the first two aren't practical during winter - that's besides the fact that I lived three miles away from the school.