Yes, it is better from a capacity point of view.
If you have a linear path that is x metres wide, and you want/need to move a certain number of people, not-cars will move more people:
* https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Corridor...
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis–Mogridge_position
Or, from another perspective, you have a budget of $/€ y for transportation, what mode of transportation will allow you to move the most people for that money? Unless you believe in MMT, government budgets are a finite resource, so how do we get the most bang for our buck?
Certainly you need some roads as vehicles such as trucks (UK: lorries) are very handy for society in running the economy. I myself own a car, a motorcycle, a bicycle, and have a transit pass (though I can use debit/credit tap-to-pay) and use each mode when appropriate. But the overemphasis on automobiles—specifically for private transportation—is suffocating the availability for other options.
To go back to your analogy: if you have a starving population, then factory farming is better because you can provide more calories to more people. In that case organic is worse because you may be sacrificing people's well-being by not having enough capacity. Once you solve your first problem (enough calories), then you have the luxury of other considerations.