Well, they’ve got a nerve, haven’t they? What’s the matter with these sickos? Don’t they get it that planners and academics know what’s best for them?

A better approach would take advantage of the fact that proximity to transit increases property values.

Spoken like a true homo economicus. Property values 1, human values 0. Game over.

I don’t think this statement is even true as a general rule. Yes, in mass-everything cities like New York where lots of people have no choice but to use mass transit, of course property values are greater near stations — I don’t think even most New Yorkers would prefer to live next to the remaining elevated tracks.

But offer people a choice to live far from mass transit but where they can use a car conveniently and the infrastructure supports getting to work by driving: guess what percentage will choose mass transit?

This is exactly our social history. Once people could live away from urban centers and go where they wanted when they wanted in their own vehicles, overwhelming numbers voted with their feet on the gas pedal to move away from the urban core.

But you are frustrated. Your gambit is to make it as inconvenient as possible to get around by car, so your victims will be forced to use mass transit. You will fail, and you should fail.