In a city of ten thousand, there is no reason why 20 to 40% of trips shouldn't be done on foot or on a bike. A bus network can easily provide mobility in a city

In a city of ten thousand, there is no reason why 20 to 40% of trips shouldn't be done on foot or on a bike. A bus network can easily provide mobility in a city of 50 to 100 thousand. In Sweden, some mid-sized cities have lower car use per capita than Stockholm, the capital. Anyway, I think you've got it all wrong. There's no good reason NOT to cram into large cities. In the past, people had one job and they did it till the day they died. Most small towns of the size you describe were built around one employer. In the modern economy, having one job only during one's life is next to unheard of, at least, in the private sector. What replaces job security is the ability to find another employer in close proximity, so you don't need to uproot yourself and your family when you change job. It also means that you can have a few big companies working the same sector, then have a lot of small companies specializing in providing professional services for these big companies, which creates a very dynamic industry where the contractors acquire expertise working with the big companies and can share that expertise with startups and smaller companies. That's why Silicon Valley exists and why even IT companies, the most liable to transfer to telecommuting, tend to gather around a few hubs rather than spreading far apart. Telecommuting is also not applicable for a lot of industries, even when it is, being physically present in one office can be quite beneficial for expertise sharing through casual contacts rather than relying on formal internet communication.