Ah, I see. From a 10,000' view this makes sense, but at least in my local political context, local government is relatively powerless to do much to reduce personal vehicle usage. But they do have total control over what buses are used. So I don't see those changes as direct alternatives.

Changing from the personal car as the default means of travel is going to require a large, powerful political movement. It's not something government leaders can do unilaterally. The backlash will be very intense. So I think it's up to concerned and motivated members of the community to create a positive force for change that overwhelms that opposition.

A fair point. I think I largely agree. But in the US there are a lot of grants for electric vehicles. Most public agencies are totally paralyzed and can't do anything new without federal funding. My suspicion is it's easier to get money for shiny new buses than for a new line. Especially because capital upgrades are mostly a one time cost while a new line requires ongoing funding. Funding they largely don't have.

When I talk to my transit agency about new lines they look at me like I'm crazy and explain that they're fighting as hard as they can just to maintain existing service. But it's totally possible or maybe even likely there is mismanagement at play there.

"Light duty" trucks (or rather, 95% or so of them).

most unnecessarily huge passenger vehicles

Most of the passenger vehicles. A good chunk of heavy trucking could be replaced with rail too.

I didn't mean any category would be totally eliminated, just the numbers reduced substantially for some.

Having more public transport and especially more electrified public transport would definitely help with that. I still don't really know what you're getting at here.

Whataboutism.