In 2016, Lyft cofounder and president John Zimmer wrote that by 2025 private car ownership would all but end in major U.S. cities. Fast forward: We’re not just off track but moving the opposite way.
Although the prediction should have been treated as unbelievable at the time, it was widely reported as credible, often with little scrutiny or independent analysis. Many readers and editors seemed eager for it to be true, perhaps because it fit a familiar story in which software rapidly overturns old systems.
Technological salvation is alluring, but enthusiasm can obscure how transportation really works. Smartphones and online retail moved fast because they could. Mobility is different. It is defined by land use, the allocation of rights, privileges, and funding, and infrastructure that lasts decades while continuously locking in supporting investments along the way.
Cars dominate because policy made it so. Highways, subsidies, zoning, finance, and design standards formed a meticulously-crafted ecosystem for automobiles. Homes have been separated from daily destinations, with gaps filled by roads that are wide and fast.
Transit, cycling, and walking are less common than driving. But it isn’t because they are inherently weaker or less popular. It’s because our current system treats the car as necessary and central for almost every trip, and constrains and prioritizes from there.
Automated vehicles have advanced, but slowly and within limits. Companies like Waymo show that meaningful progress takes time and careful deployment. We are prone to sweeping claims when they sparkle with tech optimism.
Looking ahead, we should not expect transformation to come from a single breakthrough. Rather, it will come from changing policy, reimagining urban design, and putting people at the center of mobility. That means funding choices, street space allocation, and land use decisions aligned with what we say we value.
The next time you hear about a miracle transportation breakthrough, here are some questions to ask:
1. What independent evidence supports this claim, and how could it be tested or falsified?
2. Which policies, budgets, and standards would need to change for it to work, and who has the authority to change them?
3. How must street design and land use shift to make the promised outcomes practical and safe?
4. What is the impact on people with below-average incomes and folks who can’t readily drive, including youth and the growing number of aging seniors?
Moreworks 