> with a population density of 459 people per km^2 is going to be completely different than the US with its 35/km^2. This is a silly comparison though. Large

> with a population density of 459 people per km^2 is going to be completely different than the US with its 35/km^2. This is a silly comparison though. Large swaths of the US are either completely uninhabited or nearly completely uninhabited. If you want a better comparison, look at New Jersey. Its population density is 488 people per km^2, so a little higher than the Netherlands even, yet its infrastructure is dismal comparatively despite having the density to support Netherlands-style infrastructure. Almost all major population centers in the US look like this -- dense enough to support much better, but yet we don't have it. The fact that it wouldn't work in the vast rural expanses of e.g. Wyoming don't mean that it wouldn't work for our big metropolitan areas.