You make some excellent points. I hope you’ll understand a little nuanced disagreement.

In new cities (towns, suburbs, what-have-you) it is a great advantage to put in any kind of rail because of just the investment security you suggest. Stations here in Japan offer little predictable bubbles of goods and services. I know I’ll find a convenience store and a restaurant or two. The lines create corridors for residential living with little need for cars.

My neighborhood was designed around passenger rail services rather than light rail. But knowing where the stations would be allowed the planners to put in many, many kilometers of paths for walking, bicycles, strollers, and the like that connect the stations with schools, apartments, clinics, supermarkets, parks, and most other stuff you’re looking for in a place to live and raise a family.

In older cities, however, I think it best to hang on to bus lines. Cities evolve over time and it is very useful to have buses that can link areas that have been repurposed or rezoned due to unforeseen trends. For example, a warehouse district may become defunct as the city grows and shipping needs change. That warehouse was set up for trucks and/or ships but never had train service. As the warehouses are turned into lofts and galleries and what-not, it is probably better to quickly set up a bus line and allow people and businesses to move in right away without needing to rely on cars. It may seem impossible, impractical, or just too expensive to ever put in light rail, but a successful bus line might (just might) convince folks to make the transition.

TLDR: Rail is great for new towns. Buses are better for rezoned parts of older cities.