> I don't know how to explain to you that an increase in supply results in the price of a good decreasing.

You assume that the _demand_ is constant. It's not. And the supply increases can't feasibly outpace the demand increases.

> Yeah, because downtown office space costs more & goes disproportionately to higher-paying finance jobs. That has nothing to do with density—that's just finance bros wanting to work in the fanciest skyscrapers.

And why does this happen in Seattle, SF, Chicago?

> Your source refers to cars generally

New cars. An average car is now 13 years old.

> Even with your $500/month figure, transit is still much cheaper.

I literally provided you the source that proves that just the OPERATIONS budget is the same order of magnitude as the _total_ cost of car ownership, including capital expenses, insurance, and financing. This ensures that the total cost of transit will dwarf the cost of car ownership.

> Again, Manhattan is unique.

No, it's not. Seattle's failrail will cost about the same amount per track mile. It's so far projected to cost $120B, or over $120k for each and every houseshold.