3 ms·
Interesting to note: the turnout (5.6%) is even lower than when it was decided to ban e-scooters sharing systems (7.4%). Also note this only applies to vehicle
by Aissen 3y ago
Interesting to note: the turnout (5.6%) is even lower than when it was decided to ban e-scooters sharing systems (7.4%).
Also note this only applies to vehicles from non-residents. And that parking in public spots is already very expensive in Paris; limited to a maximum of 6h, which will cost you up to 75€: https://www.paris.fr/pages/payer-son-stationnement-2129 https://www.paris.fr/pages/payer-son-stationnement-2129
- pjc50 3y ago> the turnout (5.6%) is even lower than when it was decided to ban electric scooters public sharing (7.4%). These things should really have a quorum requirement.
- rjst01 3y agoMost eligible voters are probably not personally affected and so didn't see a need vote. A quorum would make it effectively impossible to change anything.
- Zak 3y agoThe current system makes it possible for a very small portion of the population to change things for everyone. I'm not sure that's better.
- vr46 3y agoBring in Australian-style compulsory voting then.
- Gigachad 3y agoIn Australia there would be no public vote for this. It would just be some internal council decision.
- soco 3y agoIf said "everyone" would care, they'd definitely show up at the booths. So the change is better indeed, benefiting those few who care.
- wongarsu 3y agoIf a small portion of people is in favor of a change and the rest is ambivalent, does that mean the change shouldn't happen?
- tgv 3y agoOTOH, perhaps 95% don't care either way. Setting a minimum turn-out is a way to kill all referendums. It's only a "good" idea when you're in power.