Not seeing it mentioned in the other replies, so I'll mention that (at least the way I read it) "our massive car addiction" should be taken as a societal addict

Not seeing it mentioned in the other replies, so I'll mention that (at least the way I read it) "our massive car addiction" should be taken as a societal addiction to cars rather than addiction of any individual. If someone lives in a place where a car is the only feasible way to meet their day-to-day needs, it's not fair to say they're addicted to their cars; however we might question why they find themselves in that situation in the first place. Often this comes down to societal pressures (zoning, lack of funding for other modes of transportation, etc.) which are largely outside the control of individuals. The challenge is to change the cultural mindset from "I need a car today, so cars are a necessity for life" to acknowledge that other options can be viable if we, as a society, are willing to recognize and seriously consider them. > ... the only real option that exists is reorganizing housing across the whole society to massively increase density and to mix commerce zoning with homes in a way currently unheard of. Places like this already exist (ie. basically any major urban center), but I don't think the intent is that every place needs to be like that. Small steps toward better options (eg. allowing limited commercial redevelopment in residential-only areas, improving the safety/speed/accessibility of alternate transit options) should be the short-term goal, and we can work slowly towards them. But societal pressure (eg. from NIMBYs and zero-sum car-first people) often makes even small improvements glacially slow or impossible.