AMAC Exclusive – By Andrew Shirley
Recent research is shedding new light on just how valuable cars and car culture are for the American economy – and further undercutting the case for liberals’ utopian plans to radically reengineer cities and suburbs to do away with personal automobiles.
Leftists have spent years arguing that, in order to stave off a supposed climate change apocalypse and solve alleged housing shortages, Americans must ditch their minivans and pickup trucks and move into densely-populated cities where everything is just a short walk or bicycle ride away – a concept dubbed the “15-minute city.” Under this vision for the world, everyone would live in a jam-packed urban core like those seen in New York City, Paris, or London.
A Washington Post article from last November aptly summarizes the “15-minute city” argument. “Amid smoldering housing and climate crises, the 15-minute-city concept offers a way out of both, reducing our dependence on cars to go about our daily lives and freeing us to spend our time as we choose,” writes “Climate Advice Columnist” Michael Coren.
But is that really the case?
According to a pair of recent articles, the answer is a resounding “no.” As The Economist detailed shortly before the Post article was published, “vehicle-dependence makes the country fairer and more efficient.” Not only is a car-centric culture not harmful to economic development, it is crucial to building and maintaining a strong economy.
The piece specifically notes a study conducted by several prominent economics professors that examined road speeds in 152 countries. Unsurprisingly, “wealthy countries outpace poor ones. And within the rich world, America is streets ahead: its traffic is about 27% faster than that of other members of the OECD club of mostly rich countries. Of the 20 fastest cities in the world, 19 are in America.” In other words, there is a direct link between the strength of a country’s economy and how quickly people can get around via car.
“Many Americans,” the Economist piece continues, “already live in 15-minute cities, so long, that is, as they get around by car. Most of the essentials—groceries, school, restaurants, parks, doctors, and more—are a quick drive away for suburbanites.”
In another piece for New Geography published last December, Urban Reform Institute Founder and Senior Fellow Wendell Cox details another study from the University of Minnesota which also found “a previously undocumented, first-order relationship between a country’s economic development and the speed of vehicle traffic in its urban networks.”
Moreover, there is also a direct link between car travel times and job accessibility. “Even in the transit-rich New York metropolitan area,” Cox writes, “six times as many jobs are accessible within 30 minutes by car compared to transit.”
This finding cuts directly against the liberal assertion that ditching cars and packing as many people as possible into densely populated urban areas will make the economy more “equitable.” As has always been the case, cars are a great equalizing force in the American economy, allowing people from poor areas with few jobs to find work outside their immediate neighborhood.
As Cox writes, even the liberal infatuation with cities like Paris is short-sighted. While it is indeed the case that about 2 million people live in Paris proper and most have everything they need accessible within a short walk, this population only accounts for a fraction of the more than 10 million people that live in the greater Paris metro – most of whom rely on cars to get to and from work.
Even the left’s assertions that car culture is bad for the environment don’t match with the data. Even if one accepts the left’s premise that greenhouse gas emissions are an existential threat to the planet, American passenger vehicles account for only about 2.5 percent of global emissions. Eliminating that would mean eliminating passenger vehicles entirely – a prospect that is simply unrealistic given that most American infrastructure is car-centric.
Additionally, the public transit that Americans would have to rely on if they were to get rid of their cars is notoriously unreliable. Ridership on subways and bus lines is down nationwide with few indications of a recovery on the horizon.
Still, however, Democrats at every level of government have continued to pour billions of taxpayer dollars into schemes to make cities less car-friendly and supposedly more walkable. The only problem is, Americans don’t seem at all interested, and the data suggests they shouldn’t be.
Andrew Shirley is a veteran speechwriter and AMAC Newsline columnist. His commentary can be found on X at @AA_Shirley.
