And it controls infinite amounts of money? As I've said in other comments, I'm all for investing heavily in transit infrastructure. If you want a solution that totally ignores the fiscal reality of the world, then yes, I agree, dumping massive amounts of money into public transit would be part of it.

Where is the fiscal reality in grinding a city's economic activity to a halt because people can't get anywhere?

Cities can, have, and do function with fewer cars than most American cities. Reducing parking is the fairest way to reduce the usage and eventually necessity of cars.

And again, it's far more realistic than hoping that a transit authority is going to find a buried treasure chest to invest in infrastructure while the public is investing more and more into cars.

Let's eliminate cars. How does one transport a week's worth of groceries for a family of 5 on public transport? Transportation is more than moving a person from A to B.

If you want a real solution, provide tax incentives for companies to work remotely. If you eliminate commuters in those types of jobs that can work remotely, you solve almost all traffic problems.

Does an insurance salesman really need to travel to an office? 90% of that work is on the phone already and the other 10% could be replaced with video conferencing. I don't need to touch my salesman, I just need to hear what he's saying and read contracts. Unless your job involves handling physical objects, there is zero reason for a commute.

Why would you transport a week's worth of groceries in the first place? In cities designed not for cars, most people generally don't "transport" groceries at all, since everybody generally buys groceries very close to home (often on the same block), and the natural time to do it is on the way back from work/studies/whatever, so instead of having an explicit weekly trip, you just buy whatever you need now or for tomorrow, not a week's supply - and that is easily carried (not transported) for that short distance even for a family of 6+.

If you buy something that can't be carried, like a refrigerator, well, then you get it delivered.

How wacky that so many other countries have already figured this out. And that humans somehow fed themselves for literally thousands of years before cars but suddenly we won't figure out how to purchase food.

> How does one transport a week's worth of groceries for a family of 5 on public transport?

Carsharing. Or a delivery service, which some supermarkets now offer already.

A family of 5 could have one car for that, instead of two like most American 5 person families

Strap backpacks onto the kids and spouse?

Start charging for privilege of driving / parking / owning a car and you can invest the money in better infrastructure. Not that it's a popular solution with the voters, but it is fiscally sound.

Well, I'm a hardcore anti-car person, and I'm coming by just fine. I need a car about once or twice per year, when I'm moving furniture or something. Everything else can be had by public transit.

I'm well aware that other people need cars, but I'm concerned that there is one group of people that get the benefits of cars (people enjoying the calmness of their suburb which then commute into the city for work) and another group of people which gets all the costs dumped on them (people living in cities who have to live with the noise and air pollution and missing space for pedestrians).

.. or more willing to see the big picture, rather then their own comfort. There are places when common should come first not individualism.

Or I'm just not completely ignoring the problems that cars cause, you know, in reality.

In which reality do you live, wherein cars are totally fine?