Oh yeah. I forgot that the USA operate by another set of rules than the rest of humanity.

What is your point even? Population? Sprawl?

Well, yes? The Amsterdam metro area is almost 3M people. This is like acting surprised people don’t consider a dog and a cow comparable as pets.

Copenhagen is 600k. Shitty weather year-round, predicting the next point of pro car dependency arguments.

Which is still 3x the city in question. No sale.

Odense in Denmark, 200k. Good public transportation, never needed a car when visiting it. Roskilde is even smaller 50k and fine to get around walking, biking or by public transportation.

I don't think you have a clue as to how massive the United States really is.

Odense has a total area of 30 square miles.

Carson City Nevada has a total area of 150 square miles and has a population of 50k.

Demark has an area of 16k square miles. Nevada has an area of 110k square miles.

So yes. The United States and other large countries do in fact operate off of different rules than small European countries.

I'm from Australia, which is close to the size of the continental US but with less than 10% of its population. I know how big and how sparsely populated the US is, and don't really see your point.

Yeah, there are big areas of country Australia and the US where you need a car to get to anything. This is a good reason to have access to a car for some of the population. It's not a reason for the towns themselves to be built with carparks everywhere, no footpaths, massive outlets distributed far apart, bad public transport that doubles as crisis housing for the local homeless population, no pedestrian safety and comfort features like roadside trees, lawns instead of gardens, and everything else that makes up sterile urban sprawl.

most of Carson City city limits are uninhabited mountain and desert. The parts where people actually live could easily be served by decent transit: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Carson+City,+NV/@39.159966...

In that town in question, I imagine the average household lives on at least quarter acre lots if not more, and that's how they want to live. Does that sound similar to Copenhagen? Is it realistic then to expect a Copenhagen transit style to be functional in that town?

Amsterdam is not an isolated example for the Netherlands where density can easily match a mid sized US city. Further, the density of a downtown district in that same town could easily match the density of a block in Amsterdam (the buildings are only 2 to 4 stories tall)

The examples from those other towns and general strategies employed could easily translate to a smaller town. Alternatively, that smaller town could use towns in the Netherlands as a template for growth rather than say LA

If anything, Amsterdam is probably worse than lots of Dutch cities.

Amsterdam is hailed as some perfection, but 60% of Netherlands commutes are by car: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1013713/mode-of-transpor...

I’ve never claimed perfection. But comparing the city to the whole country is disingenuous at best.

Rotterdam is the polar opposite to Amsterdam in terms of mobility and freedom from car dependency.

That's just work, and still a pretty low percentage. Lots of folk doing grocery shopping, visiting friends, etc. by other means of transportation (cycling primarily). And where cars do intersect with daily life (i.e. not on the highway), they're integrated way more safely into the infrastructure.