Some people at the Times discuss the possibility.
I think a key point is that while it isn't realistic to imagine that much of the country will become a car free paradise, it is realistic to imagine that relatively small changes to land use, planning, and transit could reduce the number of cars that households need. They may need one, but not one per driving age member.
As for me, personally, living in one of those small number of walkable downtowns, I'm quite content without a car and lacking one doesn't negatively impact me at all. That wouldn't be the case if affordable and convenient carsharing wasn't available. I easily could live without a car in that case, but at some point I'd probably decide it was a luxury I was willing to pay for. Cars are useful things, even if you don't need one.