>>1343225Many people conflatate "rural" with "not living in a metro area with a million people", which is pretty dumb. For me, a city/metro size of like 100-300k people is ideal. These kind of places have pretty much all amenities, decent enough public transit, and are bikable. I know shit about america, but places like Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, Charleston or Sioux City all seem pretty decent to me.
>How are rural places in Europe without a car now?Not good, for the most part. Again, rural doesn't mean the same thing everywhere, but most of the time living without a car would be pretty tiresome.
