His criticism is generally correct, but I did have to stop watching the videos because he is so sanctimonious and patronizing. It's pretty easy to call North Americans stupid from Amsterdam, but most planners and urbanists have known the solutions long before the guy started his youtube channel (probably before he was born). He's not the first, or the only person criticizing Canadian infrastructure. The people who have their life dedicated to fighting for improvement deserve credit for doing what, up util the last decade, has been a thankless job.His criticism is spot on. Too bad you can't get past your butthurt to see it. I'm so glad there's somebody calling out all the usual Canadian excuses for building crap infrastructure. And it's telling that you have to fall back to the usual excuses.
One of the steps in improving infrastructure is having a solvent city. Considering the state of London at various points in history, there have been a lot of savvy decisions that are leading to, not just new infrastructure, but new private sector investment and new urban real estate investment. (obviously there have been bad decisions as well) Basically-- London is a troubled but improving town when it could have, just as easily, become a dying city akin to some US counterparts. If you are going to use Oulu, or Utrecht as a case study then you also have to include Flint, or Gary Indiana as a comparison as well.