> So any characterization of USA vs Europe positing Europe as some sort of walkable-heaven is really just idealized bullshit. What’s “bullshit” is using the ex

> So any characterization of USA vs Europe positing Europe as some sort of walkable-heaven is really just idealized bullshit. What’s “bullshit” is using the example of satellite malls, a global phenomenon due to obvious reasons (land and real estate pricing) as somehow proof that Sweden or similar countries aren’t walkable, without mentioning the huge divide in the feasibility of using public transport. It’s not equal if a mall is kilometers away from the city center, but in one case you have public transport available and in the other it’s for all practical purposes impossible to get there without a car. In addition to that, even locations outside the city center are often safely walkable, if you would want to. This comes down to a difference in city planning and the assumed value of pedestrian traffic. I seriously don’t understand how that can be a contentious point, it’s well known that city planning in the US is more car-centric than that in Europe, and that consistent public transport is almost unheard of in the US outside of large cities. That doesn’t mean all of the US is impossible to access without a car, nor does it mean all of Europe is possible without one, but the difference in planning is completely obvious.