FluffyPotato

Rural doesn't mean a farmhouse in the middle of nowhere. Small towns and villages should absolutely get a train connection.

I don't live in the US. Are you saying 20% of all people in the US live outside any settlement?

Even if that's the case that's one country, it's applicable to every other country.

Of course there are exceptions, there are people who live in the absolute ass end of nowhere and they should have a car but those people are a tiny minority. They are in fact such a minority it makes no difference if they drive an ICE car or an electric one when it comes to climate change.

The vast majority of people live in cities, towns, villages, etc. Hook those up with train tracks and if a city is big enough build trams in the city and you got 99% of the people covered, while reducing road maintenance budget to almost nothing, improving local air quality massively, reduce microplastics from tires to pretty much nothing, make noise pollution a thing of the past and reduce tailpipe emissions to a negligible amount.

I'm saying build trams and trains, both require like no maintenance, are cheap to build and solve the most issues. It's a better investment than EVs.

Tram tracks last forever and don't need roads. Also cars and trucks are responsible for like 90% of road damage, for example pedestrian roads last decades with zero maintenance. If cars and trucks got Thanos snapped the budget for road maintenance would be miniscule.

Roads and parking mostly

Actually maintaining car infrastructure is quite a lot more expensive than setting up public transit. The issue is that the effects of climate change are here and will get worse faster and faster while EVs are a drop in the ocean as far as solutions are.

Sure, advocate for EVs if you want but don't pretend they will have a meaningful effect with the environment unless you can replace every ICE vehicle globally and even then public transit would have a massively higher impact while easier and cheaper to implement.

The highest impact for climate change would be to force the 10 or so companies that produce like 70% of CO2 to not do that or just bomb their factories or something.

Still the only self-hosted option that has a native app for my old ass TV so I'm not switching until it becomes more trouble than it's worth or my TV breaks.

infrastructure and public transit solve the same issue but infinitely better while EVs are accessible only for people with enough disposable income and are comparably very bad at helping with climate change so I'd rather focus on a more accessible solution that helps more.

In my country people buy used cars pretty much always because of cost and used EVs aren't really a thing I have seen. There also aren't many charging stations and local power is mostly produced from oil shale so EVs do squat to help with anything. Public transit on the other hand is easy to advocate for because it's widely used and most people prefer the tram over car in my city already which is like the best form of transportation over short distances.

To be fair EVs only solve the tail pipe emission problem of cars and not like the 50 others. It's would be much better to focus on public transit and pedestrian and bike infrastructure, that solves more issues and is accessible to everyone.

Wow, this definitely is the most insane claim I have seen in the last 3 months at least.