And car drivers will never going to be minority, because it’s impossible to replace flexibility of the car.

Helicopters are far more flexible, but you wouldn’t make the same argument because it would be absurd. Cars will not be dominant because we will either replace them or society will collapse and destroy the vast logistic network they need to exist.

I haven’t owned a car in years. I have two kids, and I’m able to take care of all my needs with a bakfiets and a longtail bike. There are things that would make bikes far more flexible, like more bike cars on trains and metros.

But it’s honestly good enough. Sometimes you just don’t do things, or things are a bit harder. I accept that trade because I’m not literally destroying my children’s future.

It would be easy to ban cars from Amsterdam or Utrecht. They aren’t banned in Amsterdam because there are too many people who are too rich to walk. It’s not about flexibility there, it’s about keeping the ultra rich safe.

Cars are only affordable and flexible because they have been made that way. Roads are massive investments that take away funds from other infrastructure. They are supported by massive subsidies: fuel, infrastructure, military, etc.

The moment you stop dumping money in to maintaining the status quo, even as it kills us, is the moment that cars and planes stop being the best option.

Car drivers are already the minority in Amsterdam. In the core metro area, there’s less than .6 cars per household, while there are more bikes than people. If cars “will never be the minority,” how are they literally the minority rights now?