I think we can rule out black helicopters and hit men taking out green entrepreneurs to protect corporate monopolies, but there are well documented cases of corporate interference in the market to promote their own agendas. In the 40s, oil and automobile companies invested heavily in Los Angeles mass transit and real estate, and then let the system just fall apart through neglect, favoring the introduction of not only automobiles, but housing and settlement policies which require people to rely more on personal transport.

This, by the way, is perfectly legal, and by the standards of that time, was considered perfectly ethical, even good business. The press at the time called it progress. Many American cities had excellent mass transit systems until the 60s, and suddenly these systems started to fall apart. No doubt this was partly due to social conditions and settlement patterns, but deliberate corporate policy and judiciously applied influence in local government played a role. I lived in Pittsburgh in the late 70s and there was a very efficient system of electric trolleys which made the use of personal autos unnecessary in the urban center. Pittsburgh neighborhoods were also self-contained, with employment centers and retail businesses within easy range of the pedestrian or bus rider. Of course, if you had to go into the suburbs, you needed a car. But there would have been no suburbs without cars.

People bought cars because they offered convenient acess to cheap real estate, and because they were very economical to operate after the war; but part of that economy was due to transfer of the true costs to other sectors. We pay for gas and maintenance, but cars run on roads, and constructing them is an enormous expense which we pay through taxes. Consider parking costs, accident injuries, and pollution costs, not to mention the infrastructure, administrative and technical, the costs of automotive convenience are enormous. When you figure the total cost of automobiles, suddenly mass transit becomes very attractive. Another issue is that the widespread use of automobiles has allowed settlement patterns which now make them essential. Our cities were designed for horse traffic, they adapted well to mass transit, now they have adapted to cars, and simply discouraging automobiles and adding monorails will not work.

The problem has progressed to the point now where an oil shortage or sudden rise in fuel costs will precipitate a crisis, and something must be done, but it cannot be done fast. If we just pull the plug on cars, the nation falls apart. We need very long-range planning (and a political nightmare that will precipitate) to gradually reduce the dependence on automobiles, and we need, in the interim, cars designed to meet the needs of the transitional period, which may last a generation or even a lifetime. In short, we need small, cheap, slow, cramped cars if we want to be able to continue driving at all.

Think of what you use a car for 90% of the time, what you really need it for. You need a car to go to work and to go shopping. Do you need a v8, 300 horsepower, and the ability to haul 8 people to go down to the corner and buy a pack of smokes? Surely there's a better way.