"But that will make it cost prohibitive to own an SUV!!!"
Yes... Yes it will.
You call it a bug.
I call it a feature.
This whole vehicular size arms race needs to go away please.
It's so retarded that people think they need to get bigger cars to "protect" themselves in accidents. Just feedback looping stupidity.
The next "logical" step after SUVs is driving APCs in the name of safety.
While this is great, someone who doesnt mind paying a 100k for a car wont mind the extra fees.
What would really change the game is changing existing parking spaces to fixed size parking spaces and if your over that you get towed.
That would mean they have to park their car somewhere more remote which would incentisize not buying huge cars to begin with
I can't speak for Parisians, but here in the us my experience is that it's the people who drove the big cars who bitch the most about the price of gas.
So the added cost would definitely be a disincentive.
There's a ridiculous thing in the US that Europeans probably don't know about called "rolling coal," where people in big pickup trucks that they never use for hauling anything because it would scrape the bed modify their truck to belch out a huge cloud of black smoke on demand.
I have a Prius. They love doing it to me, because of course a hybrid that still uses gas must mean that I'm one-a them commie tree-hugging hippies. They probably pay as much in gas to do it once as it would take to get my car to go 5-10 miles. And they're the ones putting Biden 'I did that' stickers next to gas pumps when gas prices go up.
Hey rednecks, you know what you have to do to not worry much about gas prices? Buy a fuel-efficient car.
It's a gentle nudge.
If you're picking a car, and didn't think about it very much, something like paying more for parking might well nudge you to a smaller car.
And it means when those 100k cars go on the second hand market for 20k a few years later, the people paying that much will not be happy with the fees.
On a slight tangent, range rovers are being targeted by criminals. To the point where RR ups the security, and it's worked around in a month or so.
This has lead to insurance premiums going way up. And while there are a few people just choking down the payments, others are switching away from RR, or from SUVs entirely.
It doesn't put every customer off, but it certainly affects a chunk.
While this is great, someone who doesnt mind paying a 100k for a car wont mind the extra fees.
Not just that, it removes the.. let's call it 'shame factor'. Some people that would feel bad about driving big, polluting cars in the city now will feel perfectly justified: they are paying extra for the privilege. This will not reduce the number of cars and likely will increase it. It's simply a bad policy. As you said, number of parking spots for big cars should be reduced each year putting greater and greater pressure on the owners to get rid of them.
Suck it, SUV owners in Paris.
But really, suck it every SUV owner. They're terrible in every single way and no one can change that.
As an SUV owner, I agree. It tries to do too many things, so it's not good at any of them. When we had kids, I wanted a minivan. They're ugly, they don't get good gas mileage, their handling is like a pregnant yak- but if you need to haul around kids and their stuff, there's nothing better. My wife at least considered it, but we ended up with a hybrid SUV. I don't completely hate it, but I still would rather have gotten a minivan.
54.6% voted for the increase.... turnout was 5.7%. So just over 3% of the eligible Parisian population voted for this.
The turnout for those things is always extremely low.
LOL at all the SUV drivers that didn't go to vote
They were trying to find parking during the vote and missed it.
Easiest vote in the world is to vote to raise someone else's taxes. We should do that for billionaires.
Not just "someone" else's. SUV owners'. Specifically. For a good reason.
Actually, in Paris, if you own an SUV or drive one in the city, you're rich. Poorer can't afford one and even a car is too expensive. It's already a tax on the rich.
For more taxes on the wealth, it's up to the national government and it's a complete different story.
Wait, they banned electric scooter rentals?
Is the main argument that they're unsightly?
So, I'm pretty sure they're talking about the rental-scooters, not all scooters, which, peopel who tend to buy their own don't do these things... but....people get hurt on them, they increase accidents. People do stupid shit, like riding on sidewalks and trying to zip through pedestrians.
they get locked up all over the place, blocking sidewalks, entryways, bikeracks, etc.
in short the rental things are a massive nuisance,
I'd like to add that Paris is one of the tightest cities there is in Europe. there's just so little space already. with thousands of badly parked scooters cluttering up sidewalks people got fed up very quickly. the vote was pretty one sided IIRC.
They said they're dangerous and cause stress for pedestrians
Stand up scooters should use the bike lanes.
AFAIK, the main issue wasn't where they're used but where they're stored. While scooters riding on sidewalks is an issue, the bigger issue is them cluttering the sidewalk and becoming an impedance to pedestrians, especially those with disabilities.
Parisians hate their fellow countrymen almost as much as they hate Americans.
This has to be the most American take of the week
Car-brain plus assuming the french think about them, that's some top tier copium
Bruh, when you get a SUV/truck to drive around, you're declaring war on everyone else. It's literally an arms race.
Parisians don't give a shit about Americans one way or the other. I was just there and everyone was nice to me like they are to everyone else.
I'm sure the folks who drive larger vehicles because they're hauling things like wheelchairs will protest that.
There ARE valid reasons for SUVs.
There ARE valid reasons for SUVs.
no. not really.
Professionals who need something with storage space for work use vans.
People who need to also transport a wheelchair will use a different car, that is not terribly to get in and out of.
SUVs have 0 reasons to exist, especially outside the US
The prices will apply to vehicles weighing more than 1.6 tonnes with a combustion engine or hybrid vehicles, and more than 2 tonnes for electric vehicles.
Seems like it applies to vans as well
fair enough. But at that point it's basically another business expense.
SUVs don't really do much in the area of "hauling stuff around". They are really really bad at it, if you compare it to normal transporters
Well, it shouldn't be hard to write in an exemption just for folks with wheelchairs. It's almost a non-issue.
Luckily the bus and subway in Paris are both wheelchair accessible, safe, and easy to use.
if you have a wheelchair you get dedicated parking spaces anyway. what's your problem? what are you talking about?
I'm pretty sure disabled driver have free parking.
And those with the proper credentials can be e excepted.
They will be exempted, as well as residents and professionals.
This thread was weird to read as an owner of a CR-V. I checked and it's just under the weight limit for the new law, and it fits easily in "compact" parking spaces, but I think of it as an SUV because that's what it looks like.
This limit needs to be instituted at a country level.
For example now that the Volkswagen up/Skoda citigo/seat Mii has been put out of production, there isn't a single car made by all the brands of the Volkswagen group that's shorter than 4 meters.
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/