Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cars are a major cause of global warming, so there is a pressing need to curb their use. People don't inherently need cars (or big cars), we have to change our ways to drive less.
I won't really get into the politics of vehicles, but many people do need a car if they are to make a living, thinking otherwise is naive and unrealistic. For many, it is their living. Others need it for personal freedom, some people enjoy a road trip; others like to be able to visit friends and family. Perhaps some even use a vehicle to come take care of sick and elderly living in rural areas. People who don't live…
Like I said with "people don't inherently need cars", this line of thinking is anchored in the wrong thing. It's of course trivially true that many current jobs rely on cars, but we have to rapidly change that - otherwise much worse things than carlessness and change of job will happen to people and the ecosphere.
Try s/cars/slaves/ in your text to see what I mean.
Re coal - it is a logical fallacy to deny necessary improvement A because we have not made a tangential, equally necessary improvement B yet. Of course we have to stop burning coal as well.
Re cities - history does know instances of people living outside cities before widespread private car ownership...