Viewed by itself it's also quite deceptive, because there is so much subsidy FROM drivers TO public transportation.
Calling that a subsidy is a lie, one of many by leftists on this topic. Property taxes exist to pay for community services such as police, fire departments, schools, libraries, and parks. Roads do not generate any demand for the last three, so there's no sense in taxing them for them; and at least in California, the highway patrol are funded entirely from vehicle registration fees.
Which ones? Any highway bond written in the last few decades has paid the same interest as other bonds, otherwise it wouldn't sell. The feds used to heavily fund highway building; now most federal transportation money is earmarked for transit projects that they know nobody will ride.
Transit system advocates come in two types: people who are still under the delusion that others will ride transit, thus freeing up the highways for themselves; and people who know perfectly well that anything spent on transit is wasted, but who would rather waste car-tax and gas-tax funds than allow them to be spent on needed road expansion.
The environmental movement in general is really a front for a bunch of rich elitists whose attitude is "we've already got our nice homes, and we don't see the need to put up with more traffic noise or give up our view of other people's unbuilt land just so others can live as well as we do. And besides, the more of a scarcity of good housing we can create, the more *our* investments will be worth. So screw anybody who needs to buy a home!" Unfortunately, these are the people who own and operate all the local planning agencies. That, in a nutshell, is the essence of the twin scams known as urban planning and the environmental movement.