People keep saying Hidalgo's policies made people angry, but then voter turnout when she actually asks for confirmation of her policies is low. For example, 2024's vote on whether to triple the parking fees for big SUVs. [1] Turnout was tiny, but the measure passed.

Well what does that mean? It certainly doesn't mean that there is a huge wave of enthusiasm for the measure.

But conversely it also means there's not a huge wave of anger about it. It's not like the automotive lobby didn't try hard to create one; the media coverage was actually kind of crazy at the time. And with the low turnout, even a small mobilization would have been sufficient to reject this measure. But it didn't materialise. So when I read articles like this one from CNN, I just have to ask myself what the agenda is behind jazzing this up as much.

[1]: https://www.lerevenu.com/reduire-impots/conseils-impots/pari...

▲

bombcar 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I cannot read the fiery letters, but it’s quite possible, depending on how the affected metro vs the voting block overlaps, that those who vote aren’t those complaining.

Also complaining is easy, I could do it right now here on HN from any bathroom in the world; voting is comparatively much harder.

	▲	alamortsubite 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I've noticed in my city that a lot of the complaining about impinging upon the car-centric status quo comes from people who live outside the city.

▲

dwedge 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Measures like this always seem unfair to me if they aren't announced a few years in advance. A car is a large investment and people may have made different choices knowing that the rules will change. Same with the tax per mile for Electric cars in the UK.

Instead of encouraging motorists to make better choices, they just end up feeling part of a money grab

	▲	DominikPeters 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Large cars impose heavy many negative externalities on people (take up more space, make it difficult to get through a narrow street when they park there, higher mortality when they drive into pedestrians or cyclists, reduce visibility for others, aesthetically offensive). Policy is slow to shift those costs onto the people causing the externalities but it is predictable that it will happen eventually.
	▲	black_puppydog 2 days ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Very sorry for drivers' inconvenience, but if they hadn't realized how bad SUVs are for health, climate, and basically anything that's going on in the city, then announcing it early wouldn't have registered either, I think, since they clearly haven't been following any news.
	▲	thrance a day ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Hidalgo has been very clear about her plans for Paris for many years now, and people are still in favor of them. People shouldn't feel entitled to driving their oversized trucks in and out of our city, when we have such a dense and efficient network of public transit that doesn't make everyone else's lives worse through noise and pollution.

▲

b3orn 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I would take low voter turnout more as indifference than as lack of enthusiam. To take the parking fee for SUVs example, I would assume a lot of people affected by it and complaining about it aren't even living in Paris, so they can't vote against it.