The issue is that there are too many cars (including pollution, congestion, noise), not that there is not enough transit - or at least this is a separate issue

The issue is that there are too many cars (including pollution, congestion, noise), not that there is not enough transit - or at least this is a separate issue. If you could multiply by 10 the number of people using public transport without changing the number of cars on the road, would the car make less noise, or pollute less, or take up less space? I don't see how. So the two policies we are discussing really are: - reduce the number of people using cars by making using cars directly more expensive - reduce the number of people using cars by making using cars indirectly more expensive, by lowering the cost of the alternatives and funding this extra cost _somehow_ (taxing everyone whether they use cars or not?) It seems to me that solution 2 is potentially less effective, definitely way more complex and basically make everyone pay rather than just car users. Of course if the goal is either to be ineffective (just subsidy transit but don't make me abandon my car) or shield car users from most of the cost (create an expensive solution to reduce car usage by making everyone pay, not just car users); then sure, it's better.