You can use the same logic to also argue that finding a parking spot will be easier. And if more people cycle there is more demand for separated bicycle lanes, which means drivers don't need to share the lane anymore with others.

Someone can logically agree to something but emotionally still hate it.

Logically, car drivers should understand and appreciate the zipper merge, bc it makes traffic better. But emotionally it's too difficult for them to let someone in ahead of them.

Same thing you can explain about alternatives to cars making traffic better. But when they see money or (God forbid) space on the road going to infrastructure other than cars, it will feel like a zero sum game again.

That is the biggest challenge I've experienced in trying to promote alternatives

I've found that a lot of people see the use of public transport as horrors beyond comprehension, and think cycling would kill them instantly.

"A bus is only helpful when it actually runs regularly. And by 'regularly' I don't mean one each morning and another one each afternoon".

You're coming at this from a perspective that suggests people should have alternatives to cars, or maybe even that people deserve alternatives to cars. And that's fundamentally not how a shocking number of people think. Heaven help you if you suggest things like low cost fares for the poor or even free access to public transit.

A lot of people choose not to live in the city with good transit because housing is too expensive, so they live in the 'burbs. All that extra money means they can get a fancy new car lease. They drive into the city and because cars are allowed everywhere 24/7 there is no reason for them to look for alternatives in high traffic zones.

I don't understand why people are so married to the thought of driving to and from work every day. You just worked 9 hours, and you want to drive through rush hour?

As a car guy myself (barely), I think it's crazy that people are against mass transit.

Trains, teams, and busses are better by every conceivable metric, if your departure and destination is within like 20km of city outskirts. That's almost all traffic. If govts and people invested as much into mass transit as they do into roads, it'd be a no brainer. So much faster, and safer, and more convenient.

Let cars just be for rural folks and hobbyists.

Assuming that they're thinking about it logically, not as an identity issue. If they're not, the double-think is incredible. My city is about to launch an BR(ish)T transit system, and some of the NextDoor comments are wild. One woman is convinced:

1. The BRT platforms in the median are dangerous because they'll get too crowded for everybody to stand inside; and
2. BRT will be a failure because nobody will ride it.

In my experience, carbrains usually think that nobody will use the alternatives at all, so it's just a waste of space and money that could be spent on cars, and that traffic congestion is the result of corrupt politicians pocketing all the tax money that could magically fix it in some unspecified way.

I do "cars should not be the default". It seems to resonate with people.

A bus is about twice as long as a car

???? You've either got tiny buses or are driving stretch limos

Y'all either circle jerk on hating cars/car culture or try to meaningfully convince people to move away from car culture. This community will never convince "carbrains" in its current state. Accept that and have fun circle jerkin' or pivot and try to change minds.

Asking "why doesn't this group we actively shit on supporting our thought process?" or "how do we get them to change/agree?" is silly.

Your argument doesn't work to make anyone stop driving cars, though. It just makes them pro non-car in the sense of freeing up traffic so they can drive their car quicker. It doesn't make themselves take anything besides their car.