5 ms·

I'm always amused by the different default positions that different legal systems take. In America the default position would be (outside of certain highly regu

by delecti 10y ago

I'm always amused by the different default positions that different legal systems take. In America the default position would be (outside of certain highly regulated industries like drugs/medical) "let them do what they want unless a problem arises". But it seems the French approach is reversed, and they take it as a foregone conclusion to impose regulation up front. I'm sure someone more in favor of the French approach could describe it in more favorable terms, but to my American sensibilities it seems almost totalitarian.

Angostura 10y ago
You could argue that the French position: that the service could upset the French capital’s “commercial equilibrium”" shows a common-sense appreciation of the advantages of living in a neighbourhood where the is a good mixture of local shops and an attempt to preserve the benefits of this system. I'm sure that living in such neighbourhoods has all kinds of quality-of-life benefits in terms of communal life, neighbourhood cohesion and mental wellbeing that a strictly profit-driven approach doesn't recognise.
- rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
  Very much agreed. Americans have a nasty habit of valuing everything in dollar terms, especially when such things cannot be valued in such a way. What is the dollar value of clean air, friendly neighbors, and social cohesion? Sure you could factor things like physical health, but that never paints a full picture.
  - insertnickname 10y ago
    Clean air? Are you kidding me? Seems like Paris was already polluting its air before Amazon's express delivery. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/24/paris-car-free-day-pollution/72736778/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/24/paris-ca...
  - insertnickname 10y ago
    Clean air? Are you kidding me? Seems like Paris was already polluting its air before Amazon's express delivery. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/24/paris-car-free-day-pollution/72736778/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/24/paris-ca...
  - djschnei 10y ago
    I think the obvious objection to this kind of central planning is that the community isn't deciding that for themselves. If members of a community experience the kind of benefits from local business that you say (and I agree, I shop overwhelmingly local) why is it that they can't vote for those businesses with their own dollars? I see these kind of regressive economic policy as an obvious (and probably unintentional) attack on the poorest members of the community. Sure, I can afford to pay a little more and shop locally. It's a luxury to pay more for something because you enjoy the shopping experience more. Some people can't afford that luxury, and should be able to decide for themselves. Some people need to shop paying very close attention to the dollar value.
    - pauletienney 10y ago
      Discount supermarkets are less expensive than Amazon.
      - djschnei 10y ago
        Then what's the concern? People who want to pay for the convenience of amazon will pay for it, people who value the dollar more, will shop locally in this case. Outlawing advances in convenience seems regressive, no?
        pauletienney 10y ago
        The point is about the small shops network in Paris. They are a vital part of the city culture, the social cohesion, the charm of Paris. The city recognize the convenience of Amazon, they are not banned. They city also recognize its commercial aggressiveness and want to protect small shops from it. Not because small shops are cute but because they are an important part of the culture and economy of the city.
        djschnei 10y ago
        Then I will point back to my original comment which you commented on. Is the importance of these shops something only the ruling class recognizes? If not, why does the protection of them need to be mandated?
  - adventured 10y ago
    > What is the dollar value of clean air Paris happens to possess among the most polluted air of any major first world city. So based on your premise, the French value their diesel pollution over their clean air - they found a (very low) price to put on it. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-20/breathless-in-paris-as-clean-air-battle-mounts-in-french-capital http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-20/breathless... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-19/paris-smog-obscuring-eiffel-tower-threatens-diesel-car-dominance http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-19/paris-smog...
fennecfoxen 10y ago
In Europe they used to have kings and nobles in charge of entire swaths of the nation's production. As a minor counterbalance they'd have alternative power centers in the form of a city's guilds who would own the rights to do certain types of business in the city. The French Revolution may have swept away the nobles, but the general structure of an economy run by the other various entrenched interests remains, and feel that they have a right to the work and customers, treating said customers like property. To this add strong nationalism and the fact that Amazon is un-French (and the French have few problems strongarming their citizens to be more French: see the French-language TV/radio content quotas). The US has seen a few of the attitudes (see: any food truck dispute) but never really had the same types of power structures ... with the exception of the Depression-era National Recovery Administration (quickly deemed unconstitutional by 9 out of 9 Supreme Court justices).
- SixSigma 10y ago
  Let's not forget there is probably some (plenty?) of anti-American feeling after France declined to join BUsh's coalition "About 40 percent of Americans tell pollsters they favor boycotting French products" Including the wonderful Freedom Fries by misunderstanding of what the french meant in french fries. http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-boycotting-wine-wont-work http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-boycotting-w...
mknocker 10y ago
American approach is more 'trial and error' while French education system is more oriented toward demonstrating that something is good or not. Hence, when they see something new coming up they want to make sure that this won't interfere the current state of things. Both approaches are good, just different.
CaptainZapp 10y ago
Here's an example from a different field. Regulation of checmicals. In Europe the regulatory framework is called REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals), while the US uses a regulatory framework called TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). There is a major difference: (from http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-825 http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-825) : REACH requires companies to develop information on chemicals' effects on human health and the environment, while TSCA does not require companies to develop such information absent EPA rule-making requiring them to do so. While TSCA does not require companies to develop information on chemicals before they enter commerce (new chemicals), companies are required to provide EPA any information that may already exist on a chemical's impact on human health or the environment. Companies do not have to develop information on the health or environmental impacts of chemicals already in commerce (existing chemicals) unless EPA formally promulgates a rule requiring them to do so. So, simplified: In Eurpe a company must provide proof that a chemical compound is not harmful, while in the US a compound is considered legal as long its harm can't be proven. While the US approach is certainly better for commerce I very much prefer the European approach. I consider the general health of the population much more important than the money that can be made by private companies. And I think the example pretty nicely demonstrates the difference in attitude between the continents.
- JumpCrisscross 10y ago
  > I consider the general health of the population much more important than the money that can be made by private companies. There's a feedback loop in the cost of innovation. Better medicines, fertilisers, preservatives, insulators, et cetera have increased both the health of the populace and wealth of their creators. Ceteris paribus, in a world with more innovative potential than downside, the less cautious society will outcompete the more cautious one.
  - Dwolb 10y ago
    > Ceteris paribus, in a world with more innovative potential than downside, the less cautious society will outcompete the more cautious one. Sure but we don't know how bad the negative externalities of accumulation of human-made chemicals in our natural environment are until we get there. We could be outcompeting in the short term with very large negative societal effects in the long term.

by delecti 10y ago

Angostura 10y ago

You could argue that the French position: that the service could upset the French capital’s “commercial equilibrium”" shows a common-sense appreciation of the advantages of living in a neighbourhood where the is a good mixture of local shops and an attempt to preserve the benefits of this system. I'm sure that living in such neighbourhoods has all kinds of quality-of-life benefits in terms of communal life, neighbourhood cohesion and mental wellbeing that a strictly profit-driven approach doesn't recognise.

rm_-rf_slash 10y ago
Very much agreed. Americans have a nasty habit of valuing everything in dollar terms, especially when such things cannot be valued in such a way. What is the dollar value of clean air, friendly neighbors, and social cohesion? Sure you could factor things like physical health, but that never paints a full picture.
- insertnickname 10y ago
  Clean air? Are you kidding me? Seems like Paris was already polluting its air before Amazon's express delivery. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/24/paris-car-free-day-pollution/72736778/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/24/paris-ca...
- insertnickname 10y ago
  Clean air? Are you kidding me? Seems like Paris was already polluting its air before Amazon's express delivery. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/24/paris-car-free-day-pollution/72736778/ http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2015/09/24/paris-ca...
- djschnei 10y ago
  I think the obvious objection to this kind of central planning is that the community isn't deciding that for themselves. If members of a community experience the kind of benefits from local business that you say (and I agree, I shop overwhelmingly local) why is it that they can't vote for those businesses with their own dollars? I see these kind of regressive economic policy as an obvious (and probably unintentional) attack on the poorest members of the community. Sure, I can afford to pay a little more and shop locally. It's a luxury to pay more for something because you enjoy the shopping experience more. Some people can't afford that luxury, and should be able to decide for themselves. Some people need to shop paying very close attention to the dollar value.
  - pauletienney 10y ago
    Discount supermarkets are less expensive than Amazon.
    - djschnei 10y ago
      Then what's the concern? People who want to pay for the convenience of amazon will pay for it, people who value the dollar more, will shop locally in this case. Outlawing advances in convenience seems regressive, no?
      - pauletienney 10y ago
        The point is about the small shops network in Paris. They are a vital part of the city culture, the social cohesion, the charm of Paris. The city recognize the convenience of Amazon, they are not banned. They city also recognize its commercial aggressiveness and want to protect small shops from it. Not because small shops are cute but because they are an important part of the culture and economy of the city.
        djschnei 10y ago
        Then I will point back to my original comment which you commented on. Is the importance of these shops something only the ruling class recognizes? If not, why does the protection of them need to be mandated?
- adventured 10y ago
  > What is the dollar value of clean air Paris happens to possess among the most polluted air of any major first world city. So based on your premise, the French value their diesel pollution over their clean air - they found a (very low) price to put on it. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-20/breathless-in-paris-as-clean-air-battle-mounts-in-french-capital http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-06-20/breathless... http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-19/paris-smog-obscuring-eiffel-tower-threatens-diesel-car-dominance http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-19/paris-smog...

fennecfoxen 10y ago

In Europe they used to have kings and nobles in charge of entire swaths of the nation's production. As a minor counterbalance they'd have alternative power centers in the form of a city's guilds who would own the rights to do certain types of business in the city. The French Revolution may have swept away the nobles, but the general structure of an economy run by the other various entrenched interests remains, and feel that they have a right to the work and customers, treating said customers like property. To this add strong nationalism and the fact that Amazon is un-French (and the French have few problems strongarming their citizens to be more French: see the French-language TV/radio content quotas). The US has seen a few of the attitudes (see: any food truck dispute) but never really had the same types of power structures ... with the exception of the Depression-era National Recovery Administration (quickly deemed unconstitutional by 9 out of 9 Supreme Court justices).

SixSigma 10y ago
Let's not forget there is probably some (plenty?) of anti-American feeling after France declined to join BUsh's coalition "About 40 percent of Americans tell pollsters they favor boycotting French products" Including the wonderful Freedom Fries by misunderstanding of what the french meant in french fries. http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-boycotting-wine-wont-work http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/why-boycotting-w...

mknocker 10y ago

American approach is more 'trial and error' while French education system is more oriented toward demonstrating that something is good or not. Hence, when they see something new coming up they want to make sure that this won't interfere the current state of things. Both approaches are good, just different.

CaptainZapp 10y ago

Here's an example from a different field. Regulation of checmicals. In Europe the regulatory framework is called REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals), while the US uses a regulatory framework called TSCA (Toxic Substances Control Act). There is a major difference: (from http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-825 http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-07-825) : REACH requires companies to develop information on chemicals' effects on human health and the environment, while TSCA does not require companies to develop such information absent EPA rule-making requiring them to do so. While TSCA does not require companies to develop information on chemicals before they enter commerce (new chemicals), companies are required to provide EPA any information that may already exist on a chemical's impact on human health or the environment. Companies do not have to develop information on the health or environmental impacts of chemicals already in commerce (existing chemicals) unless EPA formally promulgates a rule requiring them to do so. So, simplified: In Eurpe a company must provide proof that a chemical compound is not harmful, while in the US a compound is considered legal as long its harm can't be proven. While the US approach is certainly better for commerce I very much prefer the European approach. I consider the general health of the population much more important than the money that can be made by private companies. And I think the example pretty nicely demonstrates the difference in attitude between the continents.

JumpCrisscross 10y ago
> I consider the general health of the population much more important than the money that can be made by private companies. There's a feedback loop in the cost of innovation. Better medicines, fertilisers, preservatives, insulators, et cetera have increased both the health of the populace and wealth of their creators. Ceteris paribus, in a world with more innovative potential than downside, the less cautious society will outcompete the more cautious one.
- Dwolb 10y ago
  > Ceteris paribus, in a world with more innovative potential than downside, the less cautious society will outcompete the more cautious one. Sure but we don't know how bad the negative externalities of accumulation of human-made chemicals in our natural environment are until we get there. We could be outcompeting in the short term with very large negative societal effects in the long term.