The searches being used as examples here are “auto mechanic,” “italian restaurant,” and “italian food.” For the by far most common reasons for searching for the first two, and arguably a very common reason for searching for the last, Google doesn’t emphasize organic, non-local results because they probably aren’t what the user wanted. The search terms chosen are search terms that, in the vast majority of cases, are made when the user wants local results. Search for something that Google thinks organic results would be useful for, and you’ll get mostly organic results: try searching for “italian recipes.”
The other extreme here is something like DuckDuckGo. For the first two search terms, in the vast majority of cases where they would be made, the results from DuckDuckGo are almost entirely useless, as others have noted, and for the last, many users are going to get something they didn’t want.
Google has many problems. And the search tailoring can at times be problematic, for reasons other than described here. But to complain that Google isn’t emphasizing (they’re still there, after all) organic, non-local search results when it seems like the user is looking for local results that could be better presented from non-organic searches is incredibly odd. This is especially the case when the argument being made is that you’ll have to pay for all of this, when the majority of the non-organic results being described here are free, and often from databases that Google is creating organically but allowing people to correct and expand upon.