The problem is that the Belgian network is not viable either. They have way too many stops and routes that you are essentially wasting tons of money on plenty of routes barely anyone uses. The better model in that regard is the Dutch model, just with more help from the government to increase coverage. The Belgian model offers a lot of transit at a low-quality. It doesn't get people from the bicycle or car into transit. And in regard to bicycles, IMHO you don't want to get people from bicycles either, only cars. Bicycles are allowed to steal away as many transit and car users as it'd like.

Dutch transit can achieve that at a limited scale though, but is limited to fewer corridors. The future of a well working transit system lies in how The Netherlands planned it, but with more coverage. Having a service twice a day at a village of 500 is not doing anything really, except make politicians happy that they had x% covered by transit within walking distance. I much rather have the village of 2000 getting a bus service every 15 to 30 minutes.

The Dutch are on the right path IMO. They are just not provided the tools to implement it fully. But I rather see them on the right path but with limited access, than IMO the wrong path.