zahc, Germany has 80 million people in an area roughly midway in size between the states of Montana and New Mexico. Transportation needs there are quite different than in a continent-spanning country like the USA, with a proportionately greater wealth concentration per square mile. And of course, they experienced some major urban renewal in the early 1940s.
But I think you're not wrong when you associate grift with our transportation system . . . though I'd extend the grift to virtually all public works "infrastructure."
I sense an attempt at a "physics are different in this hemisphere" argument. They aren't, because there are dozens of population corridors in the US that have both higher population density and higher trip demand than exists in European countries. So it's just not true that the US is different. And, I know this is hard to believe too, the US existed before cars too. And even if it were true that our "vast size" made a difference, cars are the least efficient mode for long distances anyway. So, the US being such a mythical sprawling place, if it were true, would be the last place where a cars-only transportation policy would make sense.
But we weren't talking about long distance travel anyway. We were talking about cities and suburbs. 3/4 of all car trips in the US are ten miles are less. People drive because the government has given them no other choice, and they don't even realize it. Getting a car to get to work so they can make money to make their car payment. It's like a hampster running in his wheel.
The topic at hand was banning cars from city centers or select areas of city centers. Which is generally a good thing. I would go all-out and say most city centers in most cities should heavily discourage or block through car traffic altogether. There is nothing different about this in the US city than any other city. All of our great cities were built before cars and they would better off without cars again. Cars add nothing to the equation except noise, ugliness, pollution, danger, and generally ruining everything. The only reason they were ever accommodated in the first place makes a fascinating history, but largely was a ploy by cities to boost tax revenues by prioritizing commuters over citizens, and it backfired heavily for a variety of reasons.
I definitely don't want some elitist scumbag in govt telling me I have to go without my car/truck.
Rarely is there any such proposal that you must "go without". In the real world, usually we are talking about a proposal to limit where cars are allowed to drive. There are already an infinity of places you aren't allowed to drive, such as sidewalks, parks, places without roads, walking trails, shopping malls, etc. and so there is nothing evil about designating an area for other road users only. Unless you think cars command some special privilege, and yes in the US, just about no segment is more pampered than car drivers, so this gets weaponized into a "they are coming for your F150 because you can't drive through 8th street anymore" rhetoric.