Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Limiting car usage can only be positive

We don't need them if we all work together

Car pool denser cities alts will be available (public transit)

Cost effective and convenient

Sidewalks > roads

Convenient(s1l6)

Better for us(can still interact without over-driving)[interactive biking/walking | online interaction]

Giving our cars up in this day and age seems impossible; but if everyone can work together, new opportunities will arise that'll outweigh the convenience of having a personal vehicle. We won't need cars if we all work and cooperate with one another. Not only that but it'll become more cost effective and convenient as a whole in the long run. Once all is said and done, limiting car usage can only be positive.

Many questions would arise if this idea was approached, wouldn't we take longer to get places? Isn't it inconvenient and a step-back from personal commuting? The answer would be yes, but for the most part it's the point. Sure you make take longer to get places by car pooling or taking public transit, but if anyone is doing it there'll be no comparison of time with personal commuting, personal commuting will be gone. If no cars were available cities would compensate with free bikes when commuting or public transit. The no-car weekend in Paris allowed free public transit, so in the long-term it'd also be free (Source 2). City planning would be modified to compensate for the increased commuting time; making the long commutes a little easier. If we all work together we won't need cars, and in the end it'd be positive overall.

In a world of reduced personal commuting, the cost of living would improve as well. Money spent on gas or car maintenance would be nonexistent. Instead of using taxes on expensive roads, they'll be used on inexpensive sidewalks, just like in Bogota (Source 3). With the extra cash from no car expenses it'll be easier to purchase luxury items you may want. Cities will be made with convenience in mind, placing key stores in easily accessible areas, similarly to Vauban's store placement (Source 1). This would answer the question of inconvenience, A ten minute drive can become a ten minute bike or walk with strategic placement. In the end, a reduced car usage society would be more cost effective and convenient, a definite positive compared to an automobile society.

Cars are definitely important to many people, but only because the majority have cars. Take everyone's cars away and they wouldn't have a reason to need one. If we all work together we won't need cars, people will help one another and cities would be planned better. In this society you'd have more money to use as you please, instead of using it to survive. Most important of all, the time to take a car someplace rather than any other alternative would be the same; important locations can always relocate for everyone's convenience. A world without cars can only be positive.

Score: 4