As someone who once HAD to commute for a 45 minute car ride to work... not all commutes work with this. Public transit can help with a lot of those, but unless we rezone and rebuild most cites for shorter commutes, it won't replace all cars.

Although the practicality is questionable, I think the takeaway is that we will have to rethink mobility and dense environments with good cycling infrastructure will be the most sustainable ones. Public transportation which is great too, also requires a certain density to be feasible.

Is that why they are trying to kill their farming industry?

There is a very impressive set of reasons why we could and should encourage less CO2 intensive forms of transport, indeed many actions. However, these arguments always seem to me to take the pattern of picking the extreme example of whatever good we are hoping to achieve and then implying that everyone else could easily make the switch. There is always a wide and natural variety in things and this is true for differences between nations too. Extreme examples used like this often just end up making a bigger divide between people because the discussion misses all of the important differences that constrain choices and shape outcomes. We just end up talking from our own perspectives and experiences rather than exploring the complicated and difficult questions of how we can produce localised and regional responses to CO2 emissions drawn from fossil fuels.

Not really sure how well bikes would work where I live. The winters are harsh, and its steep hill after steep hill.