Are you really going to claim that living in a city is part of the natural world? Why is it that whenever a city has a blackout, people call the police terrified of seeing stars in the sky?
>Urbanists hate them because they are designed for cars instead of people
That may be a valid point for old cities that predate the industrial revolution. But there's nothing about NYC, LA or any of the other major US cities that are people centric. Besides, I can flip that argument on its head, cities are limiting and put people in cocoons never having to leave their own neighborhood and see the world. Have car, can travel.
>There are numerous videos from urbanism channels
Because videos from random youtubers with stated agendas are objective sources?
>The automobile is America’s largest wealth destroyer that takes car payments averaging something like $500-700 a month
That's cherry picked if I've ever seen it. There's a massive used car market and cars can last for decades when cared for. Mine is old enough to drink at this point and cost $4k outright. Now there definitely is a problem with new cars, especially EVs being a right to repair nightmare. But there's a large overlap between those who push BEVs and urbanization. I agree that there is a massive issue with the TCO of these vehicles, a battery lasts 10 years and will cost more than the value of the car to replace at that point and they aren't even making them easy to replace. And nobody seems to care. If you ask me, it almost seems as if a backdoor way to make sure the poor cant afford a car and are forced to live in cities in 20 years.
Look, you have your preference, that's cool. That's the nice thing about choice, you can live where you want and you don't have to show the commissar work papers that let you live there. Cities aren't going anywhere so there's no need to feel threatened by suburbs. People who want to live in suburbs and have a patch of grass to call their own will. And they aren't hurting you by doing so.