That's your opinion. Plenty of people have the means to move elsewhere so they can not own a car, but they don't because they don't like your vision of transpo

That's your opinion. Plenty of people have the means to move elsewhere so they can not own a car, but they don't because they don't like your vision of transportation. My own opinion is as valid as yours, which is that public transport usually sucks ass. > California [...] is a hellscape of stroads and parking lots as far as the eye can see. Many people don't see it that way. Millions upon millions, actually. The fact that California needs to tax the rich to make electric cars work is a sign that said technology is not economical. Doesn't even matter why. I'd own an electric car if I could, but every time I've considered it I've realized that it doesn't make financial sense. One might think that now would be the best time to buy an electric car, but good luck with that when wages are stagnant, YoY inflation is ~8%, and the price of goods is up. I can simply drive less or take my motorcycle. As long as California is totally cool with its gross wealth stratification, people are going to realize that they can live in an affordable area, drive to and from work, enjoy the privacy of their own vehicle, and still come out ahead from where they would be if they lived close to work. I'd be making far less money if I lived in any of the cities my workplaces have had their offices located. > every NIMBY fighting tooth and nail against allowing people to live close to jobs I've never heard of anyone not wanting that. There's NIMBY attitude that might get in the way of people living close to their jobs, but your characterization of "every NIMBY" comes off as reductionist and a gross exaggeration. Surely citizens would never vote against their own interests. No, no one ever does that. /s