> changing the economic makeup of the people that live there I really don't get this argument, even less so with the hyper-connected world we live today. The

> changing the economic makeup of the people that live there I really don't get this argument, even less so with the hyper-connected world we live today. The world's population has grown ~6x since the Eiffel Tower was built. Why do we need to cram these people into the already big cities, instead of developing the smaller towns? It's not like land is a problem, and it's not like we still depend on having our settlements on an area with immediate access to a port or river. In North America specifically, it would be a lot easier to change the zoning laws and regulations in the suburbs and increase their absurdly low density and inefficient land use, than it would be to constantly trying to put everyone and their dog in the already dense cities. The best way to avoid turning Paris into a "rich guy playground" is by creating a supply of other playgrounds to keep up with the increased demand, not by destroying the existing playgrounds in the first place.