That's the point of giant parks, nature reserves, public gardens, and the like along with cooling off the city itself and other benefits

It's not the same though.

The "leftists" on this site (and I hesitate to use that term without wanting to CW myself) like to imagine a world where all the suburbs magically disappear. It's kind of similar to how libs would totally push the "make all homeless disappear painlessly" button if they could. You got the life-long city-dwellers who say "um, ackchually, if everyone just rode bikes we'd all be okay. It's what I do when I ride my bike in Brooklyn to hang out with other hipster losers" These types you can safely ignore, because they have no idea on how to deal with the transportation issue. You also have the "I grew up in the suburbs/rural areas and I WANTED TO ESCAPE SO BADLY SO I DID AND I'M NEVER GOING BACK CUZ FUCK THOSE PEOPLE I DON'T WANT MORE EMOTIONAL LABOR" types. Ironically, it's exactly these people who are needed if anything is going to truly change, because they have first hand knowledge on how to deal with the suburban/rural types. Remember, all the successful socialist revolutions came from the rural peasantry, not the cosmopolitan coffee drinkers. So why not take a look at how places like the Soviet Union or China dealt with creating transportation infrastructure instead of wanting to unironically burn all suburbs down. For future suburbs, yeah, design them better. But how do you deal with existing infrastructure without wanting to just burn it all down? How fucking stupid and idealist. OP is totally right on this one.