Re: 1 makes 4
The same applies to new road schemes.
Well yes, induced demand occurs on all transit. But on roads it's a bad thing (increased maintenance, then people complain about potholes, and complain when you close the road to patch the potholes, and the scheme was usually conceived to "ease congestion", which it fails at - see America, "just one more lane bro"), whereas induced demand on Public Transport is a good thing - you want transit ridership approaching 100%, because that pays back your infrastructure overheads and minimises costs per-fare. And riders who represent modal share from car to transit mean there are fewer cars on the road - the best way to ease congestion is not to add more roads/lanes, but to improve public transport.
And of course, roads don't help apprentices, non-drivers, etc. They entrench a car-first society and make it marginally more convenient for people who already drive to get where they're going marginally quicker (until congestion makes it a wash).
Building roads through Stoke-on-Trent for instance won't improve traffic. No road scheme can save the city when the M6 is closed and all the blocked traffic is clogging the roads. Whereas urban rail or a tram network with dedicated running paths would be unaffected by road chaos.
Roads are important, and we must ensure those needs are met, but we've now built a very brittle society where the roads get clogged and the areas grinds to a halt, whereas in London a bad accident doesn't impact the Underground (or Overground).
