Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–189 of 189 posts

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#181

Post by yodsanklai »

briandear wrote: post #153
yodsanklai wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't say "behind" in that context. I do appreciate the convenience of 24h stores, but I don't see them as a progress for workers rights.

If the owner of a store wants to open it for 24 hours and he or employees are willing to work, how is that bad for workers rights? What’s bad for workers rights are people that would like the freedom to work a late shift or early shift but can’t because some do-gooder is trying to “protect” grown adults from making their own decisions.

> If the owner of a store wants to open it for 24 hours and he or employees are willing to work, how is that bad for workers rights?

That would be fine, but what is going to happen is that many workers will have to work night shifts unwillingly. It's bad for their physical and mental health.

Suppose you have a town with two stores. First store is willing to open 24 hours. Second store may have to do the same to compensate the loss of customers, and the workers there may have to work night shift even if they don't want to (I actually witnessed it first hand in my neighbourhood).

This is called a negative externality, and it is a well-known defect of free market. Even though you would think that opening a store 24h only impacts you and your customers, it negatively impacts other people.

This is a subjective opinion, but I would argue that the convenience of having 24h stores isn't worth the cost for the workers. Unfortunately, I think that I'm in the minority and that eventually we'll cross that line in Europe too, and it'll be hard to go back.

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#182

Post by titanomachy »

ekianjo wrote: post #180
titanomachy wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not obvious to me that only the people who can afford to live in a wealthy city centre should unilaterally make decisions affecting the greater group of people whose destinies are tied to that city. Saying "that's just how it works" is not really a justification.

Then by what logic do you justify that transient workers would have more power than the own residents of Paris about how the city should run? Because this is exactly what is suggested as more people live around Paris than inside.

Is there a possibility for middle ground between "no say at all" and "some influence"?

Also, people who live in suburbs and commute to a city centre every day may object to being called "transient workers"!

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#183

Post by mantas »

hobofan wrote: post #114
__Joker wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think most of the world lives pretty close except the US. But problem in rest of the world is not that you can't have schools, clinics, entertainment, shopping in a 15 minutes radius but the problem is finding the desired combination when you throw in you and your spouse workplace and the school to which you want to send to your children to.

> the school to which you want to send to your children to That doesn't seem to be something that most people spend a lot of thought on. E.g. in Germany less than 10% of children attend a private school, and with public schools you basically have to send them to your closest one (which isn't a big problem, as the quality of schools inside a city generally doesn't vary too much).

It's not just public/private school issue. For example here in Lithuania public schools may be specialised too. Science, arts, humanities... Quality does vary a bit too. Quality of classmates vary more than quality of education, but it's essentially part of the same package. E.g. some schools are notoriously bad for historical reasons. When gentrification just starts and better-off people move in, many of them try to send their kids to schools in other neighbourhoods.

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#184

Post by mschuster91 »

yodsanklai wrote: post #41
mschuster91 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to opening times of stores, us Germans are way behind everybody else...

I wouldn't say "behind" in that context. I do appreciate the convenience of 24h stores, but I don't see them as a progress for workers rights.

I generally agree with you, but it's utterly ridiculous that supermarkets etc. close at 8 already in some states (e.g. Bavaria). It would make more sense to keep themmopen until at least 9 or 10.

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#185

Post by progval »

briandear wrote: post #154
progval wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> despite what other commenters have said, people do want longer opening hours. No, not really. According to [0], 61% of Frenchpeople consider this a step backward for workers, while 31% think it is necessary. Though the article implies the latter might be much higher in Paris. http://www.leparisien.fr/societe/ouverture-nocturne-des-maga...

What is so wrong with freedom? Why can’t workers decide if they want to work certain hours? Why is the choice made for them by government? You know what is also bad for workers? Unemployment, and in France it’s chronically high because of so much worrying about the “workers.”

High unemployment means working conditions are a race to the bottom in some sectors. Is this what we want?

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#186

Post by olivierduval »

olivierduval wrote: post #77

With Hidalgo, Paris is becoming more and more an "Elysium" movie city-model: only a few decide Parisian of what will piss off everybody else. Remember the end of the movie ? ;-) Btw... Elysium and Elysée - the Palace of the French President... in Paris - have the same root. If it can help to understand...

I would be happy to know why some people downvoted my comment, just to understand.

I live 100m from Paris, in the suburb, so I'm a bit concerned (and knowledgable) about this subject. And the current - and maybe next - Paris mayor is only working for her own electorate (logical).

Problem is: Paris is a central city/region. You can't just "live around it". So basically when Hidalgo close the "quais de seine", it's fine for people living in Paris or tourists but it's a PITA for people from one suburb to the other one. When Hidalgo wants to shutdown the "periphique", it won't matter to parisians and tourists in Paris, but will make a really big difference for people working and living outside Paris for whom crossing Paris is the shortest way.

BTW, 90min from work to home is not really unusual in Paris suburb, and I would be the happiest man on earth if I could had just 30 min between work and home.

Moreover, Paris is becoming more and more a car-adverse city (nowhere to park, except for a lot of money) but public transportation are far from compensating this (for example: still no public transportation all night long... except one saturday night every month on a few lines... as an experiment).

So: no cars, not enough public transportations, and a central town (by design and history).

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#187

Post by baud147258 »

baud147258 wrote: post #78
yostrovs wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I visited Paris, it was the scooters that annoyed me to no end. They sounded like two strokes and were everywhere. Will they be banned too?

Well, the scooters delivering their burgers and sushis to the hipsters voting for the current mayor, so it's rather unlikely.

I see a lot of downvotes, but no coherent answers. Seems like I hit a nerve.

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#188

Post by hk__2 »

jackjeff wrote: post #167
hk__2 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The city mayor first cares about the people of that city; there’s nothing illogical here.

First the 15mins walk thing is probably already true in most district in Paris. But what you do not realize is that only a tiny minority of privileged people can actually afford to live in Paris. It's a bit like if the right of vote was restricted to people with high income. Paris is TINY. Paris is SMALLER than the borough of Brooklyn in NYC. Paris is 3x smaller than just the inner boroughs of London and 16x smaller…

> But what you do not realize is that only a tiny minority of privileged people can actually afford to live in Paris. It's a bit like if the right of vote was restricted to people with high income.

This not even a bit like that. The right to vote is restricted to the people who live there, whether they are rich or poor. Also, it’s far from a minority: with 2M+ inhabitants, that’s the largest city in France: 2x Marseille, 4x Lyon, it has the same population as the four next most populated cities (Lyon, Marseille, Toulouse, and Nice) combined. If e.g. the 11th arrondissement would be a city it‘d be in the top 10 in France by population.

Re: Paris Mayor: It's Time for a '15-Minute City'

#189

Post by pamicel »

ekianjo wrote: post #180
titanomachy wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not obvious to me that only the people who can afford to live in a wealthy city centre should unilaterally make decisions affecting the greater group of people whose destinies are tied to that city. Saying "that's just how it works" is not really a justification.

Then by what logic do you justify that transient workers would have more power than the own residents of Paris about how the city should run? Because this is exactly what is suggested as more people live around Paris than inside.

There are three groups here

- those who have a say

- those who have no say but should

- those who have no say but who don’t fill the conditions to have it

I am advocating for the second group

And it is not a spectrum, the third group’s condition is often orthogonal to the second group’s condition

Said an other way, "Paris" should be defined as a greater area, because the center has extreme day to day and structural influence over those, but there is a point where it stops being the case, of course there is a degree of ambiguity regarding where to stop, but it is definitive and unambiguous that the current state of affair is unfair

Post reply on HN