Huge parts of Europe are also car dependent and we also have urban sprawl.

I think when Americans say Europe, they mean "that part of Europe that best fits my argument".

Likely the same vice versa. Both are enormous and diverse places.

Even the most sprawled places in Europe are better than the US. Even small cities (compared to the US) have more public transit than here.

Maybe more transit, but it doesn't really help when it's not usable for folks. The biggest difference between US and Europe I've noticed (except that everything is bigger in the US) is the lack of grocery stores in the US. There's huge subdivisions with no grocery stores, so you have to enter the highway to get to a grocery store. Walking is not practically possible. In my small suburb in a small town in a small country in Europe there's two grocery stores within walking distance, four within a short bike ride. Not huge stores like Wallmart or well stocked like, I don't know, Whole Foods, but small grocery stores that sells food and everyday products.

Why would I want to walk anywhere? I have a 5000 pound car that can take me there faster then I could move my two legs!

I do it as well. I've done it in other states down here as well. Like you said its possible, but theres definitely a hit on my QoL.

> is why European cities always feel so much nicer than cities in the states you mention.

Speak for yourself. It’s all about priorities and they only feel nicer if you don’t care about affordable houses with private yards and prioritize walkability.

> Here in Canada there was this provincial deputy from a very left leaning and pro public transport party that got elected. You know the first thing she did with her salary? She bought a SUV (https://www.tvanouvelles.ca/2018/11/19/la-deputee-catherine-...)

That is a nice sound bite and proves nothing. Someone campaigning on a pro public transit agenda may well not believe that transit is yet suitable, and running on that platform is hardly incompatible with car ownership. They are nowhere near mutually exclusive. If you live in Toronto, a train won’t take you to the cottage up in the Kawarthas, nor should it more than likely. Not sure where provincial politicians have their cottages —- the Laurentides?

Cars will have uses even if transit is beefed up, certainly in the winter. Good on the provincial deputy. Or at least, a big shrug.

> And we saw how that was great during the pandemic, and that's not even mentioning other calamities that could happen. And that's not even taking snow into account. Not everyone lives in California.

We did. European cities fared much better than American ones and continue to. That’s got little to do with how the city is laid out and everything to do with how those in it act in the face of shared danger.

> Or organize planning so that everything is more distributed. There are no reasons for mega cities to exist in the Internet Age.

Sure there is. It’s vastly, and I do mean, vastly, more efficient. In terms of water, in terms of energy, in terms of carbon footprint, in terms of space. Vastly. That alone makes not having cities a dealbreaker for some whole countries like Australia where these resources are at a premium.

Cities are efficiencies of scale incarnate.

No one with a family has a small car? O...kay.

brb just going to remove the two child seats from the back of our Fiat 500

When your kids get older or you have another ...

The other poster explained well why mega cities in fact make a ton of sense for the health of the planet and the ability to plan public transportation and other services.

Europe has done significantly better with the pandemic so your point doesn’t make sense. The walkability of their towns and cities is a benefit during coronavirus.

I’ll just add that your assumptions are wrong. I can easily afford a car and it’s this sort of car-centric attitude that people without them must be too broke to afford them that is emblematic of why North America has such poor planning.