• Snapz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    5 months ago

    “But that will make it cost prohibitive to own an SUV!!!”

    Yes… Yes it will.

    • MonsterMonster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not for those who can afford 100k+ to buy it in the first place. There will be some who see this as a further requirement to show the world that they are rich enough to belong to an exclusive club.

  • veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    This whole vehicular size arms race needs to go away please.

    It’s so retarded that people think they need to get bigger cars to “protect” themselves in accidents. Just feedback looping stupidity.

      • orrk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        already exists, armed with variety of lethal and non-lethal defense systems, up-armoured to take on anything short of 30mmAP rounds

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Makes sense. The guy openly carrying weapons with the look of he is dying to use them clearly gets into less problems then the guy who doesn’t attract any attention to himself. You really want to be threatening people by just being there, that will definitely work out well for you. That’s why I carry around a matchet and scream at random people to back off

    • Kwozyman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      But how will the other people know I have money if my car isn’t huge?

      The protection argument has some merit, though. I remember seeing several studies that show survival rates are bigger for the SUV inhabitants in crashes. What SUV drivers don’t know (or simply don’t care about) is that it’s survival in the detriment of smaller cars inhabitants.

      • veni_vedi_veni@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Poor crash compatibility, and for reasons to do with chicken imports from Europe in the past (Not just bikes covers this), light trucks have less regulation in NA compared to cars, incentivizing the manufacturers to push them into consumers as well.

        It’s shittiness all round and government is like that cat from the “bachelorette woman crying” meme.

    • nexusband@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yes! Fuck them! Wait…what? Why can’t i park my Peugeot e-308 there? WHAT? No! That’s not an SUV! Well…it’s 1759 Kg and therefore an SUV. This rule is utter stupidity.

      • p1mrx@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        1.6 tonnes with a combustion engine or hybrid vehicles, and more than 2 tonnes for electric vehicles

        There might be silly examples to find, but yours isn’t one of them.

        I would look for cases where moving from petrol to hybrid pushes you over the limit. I think they should be measuring size and fuel efficiency, rather than weight.

  • DigitalFrank@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Easiest vote in the world is to vote to raise someone else’s taxes. We should do that for billionaires.

    • moitoi@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Actually, in Paris, if you own an SUV or drive one in the city, you’re rich. Poorer can’t afford one and even a car is too expensive. It’s already a tax on the rich.

      For more taxes on the wealth, it’s up to the national government and it’s a complete different story.

      • ginerel@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Well, those who did not vote are complacent to the majority vote. So I’d say that’s a win.

        Always go out there and vote, regardless of the option you choose. That’s what keeps a democratic system up and running. If you don’t, you just agree with what is decided by others and stay complacent.

  • AutoTL;DR@lemmings.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    In a referendum on Sunday, which was closely watched by other capital cities, including London, 54.6% voted in favour of special parking fees for SUVs, according to provisional results.

    “Parisians have made a clear choice … other cities will follow,” said Paris’s Socialist mayor, Anne Hidalgo, adding that road safety and air pollution were key reasons for the vote.

    She said the aim was to deliberately target the richest drivers of expensive, heavy and polluting cars who had not yet made changes to their behaviour to address the climate crisis.

    Emmanuel Grégoire, Paris’s deputy mayor, posted on X as voting began: “Heavier, more dangerous, more polluting … SUVs are an environmental disaster.”

    Under Hidalgo, Paris has for years raised pressure on drivers by increasing parking costs and gradually banning diesel vehicles, while expanding the bicycle lane network in the congested capital.

    The motorists’ lobby group 40 Millions d’Automobilistes had argued that drivers should be free to choose whatever vehicle they want, warning that the move to raise parking tariffs was unjustified and the work of “an ultra-urban and anti-car minority”.


    The original article contains 540 words, the summary contains 180 words. Saved 67%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    This thread was weird to read as an owner of a CR-V. I checked and it’s just under the weight limit for the new law, and it fits easily in “compact” parking spaces, but I think of it as an SUV because that’s what it looks like.

    • bassad@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yes it is aimed against heavy and large suv, as they are more dangerous for other road users, more polluting and take too much of public place in a cramped city.

      A CR-V and other “normal” suv does not take more place than a sedan

    • OneWomanCreamTeam@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      At least in the US they call them crossovers, unless they’re on a truck chassis, then it’s an SUV.

      This distinction isn’t really common parlance or anything, but it usually is how the manufacturers call them.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      I drive a crv and have always known it as a crossover. Although funny that you mention compact spots, I looked it up one time to see if a crv counts and it does count as compact. Never the less I had a guy scold me for parking in the spot one time. His sedan definitely had a bigger foot print and he was right on the line, while I was comfortably in the middle of the spot.

      I just looked down at the line between our cars and kind of raised my eyebrow at him while pointing out my car is smaller than his.

  • Kekzkrieger@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 months ago

    While this is great, someone who doesnt mind paying a 100k for a car wont mind the extra fees.

    What would really change the game is changing existing parking spaces to fixed size parking spaces and if your over that you get towed.

    That would mean they have to park their car somewhere more remote which would incentisize not buying huge cars to begin with

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I can’t speak for Parisians, but here in the us my experience is that it’s the people who drove the big cars who bitch the most about the price of gas.

      So the added cost would definitely be a disincentive.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.worldM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        There’s a ridiculous thing in the US that Europeans probably don’t know about called “rolling coal,” where people in big pickup trucks that they never use for hauling anything because it would scrape the bed modify their truck to belch out a huge cloud of black smoke on demand.

        I have a Prius. They love doing it to me, because of course a hybrid that still uses gas must mean that I’m one-a them commie tree-hugging hippies. They probably pay as much in gas to do it once as it would take to get my car to go 5-10 miles. And they’re the ones putting Biden ‘I did that’ stickers next to gas pumps when gas prices go up.

        Hey rednecks, you know what you have to do to not worry much about gas prices? Buy a fuel-efficient car.

    • GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s a gentle nudge.
      If you’re picking a car, and didn’t think about it very much, something like paying more for parking might well nudge you to a smaller car.
      And it means when those 100k cars go on the second hand market for 20k a few years later, the people paying that much will not be happy with the fees.

      On a slight tangent, range rovers are being targeted by criminals. To the point where RR ups the security, and it’s worked around in a month or so.
      This has lead to insurance premiums going way up. And while there are a few people just choking down the payments, others are switching away from RR, or from SUVs entirely.
      It doesn’t put every customer off, but it certainly affects a chunk.

    • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Not saying this is what you’re saying, but the average french SUV doesn’t cost 100k. In-laws bought one almost new for 15k. They’re not poor, but definitely not rich, and would think twice about buying one next time if it means they pay more for parking.

      • Moonrise2473@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        15k seems like a Dacia Duster. That isn’t considered a SUV according to the limits of that law (1400 kg)

        It’s more to limit those useless monsters like the range Rovers

      • anivia@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        15k for an almost new SUV? I think you are probably confusing a CUV with an SUV

        • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          15k € used. The (french) car dealer called the car a SUV, but I’ll admit I’m not an expert.

          But even if you call that something different, there aren’t a lot of 100k SUVs in France, I can tell you that.

          • Obi@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 months ago

            French people will drive a 20 year old kangoo and be proud of it. I know because that is me.

    • ExLisper@linux.community
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      While this is great, someone who doesnt mind paying a 100k for a car wont mind the extra fees.

      Not just that, it removes the… let’s call it ‘shame factor’. Some people that would feel bad about driving big, polluting cars in the city now will feel perfectly justified: they are paying extra for the privilege. This will not reduce the number of cars and likely will increase it. It’s simply a bad policy. As you said, number of parking spots for big cars should be reduced each year putting greater and greater pressure on the owners to get rid of them.

  • Moonrise2473@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    This limit needs to be instituted at a country level.

    For example now that the Volkswagen up/Skoda citigo/seat Mii has been put out of production, there isn’t a single car made by all the brands of the Volkswagen group that’s shorter than 4 meters.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      So, I’m pretty sure they’re talking about the rental-scooters, not all scooters, which, peopel who tend to buy their own don’t do these things… but…people get hurt on them, they increase accidents. People do stupid shit, like riding on sidewalks and trying to zip through pedestrians.

      they get locked up all over the place, blocking sidewalks, entryways, bikeracks, etc.

      in short the rental things are a massive nuisance,

      • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Wouldn’t this apply to both rented and personally-owned scooters though?

        Getting rid of the rentals might reduce the number temporarily, but doesn’t really seem to solve the problem.

        • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Someone who owns their own scooter is more likely to know local laws on where not to scoot - and if they don’t they can more easily be fined and learn them. Tourists rarely understand local traffic laws and, while you can fine them, they’ll leave next week and then a new tourist will arrive that also lacks that knowledge.

            • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 months ago

              It’s surprisingly difficult! Do you think you can turn right on a red in Provence? Would you remember to double check all your assumptions before going on vacation? Would your muscle memory fail you?

              There are a truly staggering number of stories of people getting on the highway the wrong way or going into the wrong lane at an intersection when driving in the UK - there’s so many laws and habits we learn to operate in our society… and those aren’t the same everywhere.

        • n2burns@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          AFAIK, the main issue wasn’t where they’re used but where they’re stored. While scooters riding on sidewalks is an issue, the bigger issue is them cluttering the sidewalk and becoming an impedance to pedestrians, especially those with disabilities.

        • ChrisLicht@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          The performance envelopes of vehicles sharing bike lanes these days are wildly different. I dread the day that RTO is complete, and rush-hour bike lanes are shared by e-bikes, e-unicycles, one-wheels, push scooters, e-standup-scooters, smaller sit-scooters, monkey bikes, e-skateboards, skateboards, and whatever else I’m missing.

          • Pepsi@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            so instead of that one rule, you think it’s better to have a different rule?

  • wheeldawg@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    Suck it, SUV owners in Paris.

    But really, suck it every SUV owner. They’re terrible in every single way and no one can change that.

    • Malfeasant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      As an SUV owner, I agree. It tries to do too many things, so it’s not good at any of them. When we had kids, I wanted a minivan. They’re ugly, they don’t get good gas mileage, their handling is like a pregnant yak- but if you need to haul around kids and their stuff, there’s nothing better. My wife at least considered it, but we ended up with a hybrid SUV. I don’t completely hate it, but I still would rather have gotten a minivan.

      • AnalogyAddict@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        I have a compact SUV (CR-V.) It gets good gas mileage and has enough room for my very large dogs. Some people have reasons, just a lot of people don’t.

        I’d like to see a tax on ego trucks first.

    • nexusband@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      5 months ago

      Comments from @wheeldawg@sh.itjust.works are terrible in every single way and no one can change that! Good stuff, the fact that Paris classifies everything above 1,6 tonnes as an SUV, so that put’s even a measly Peugeot e-308 in that cateogry. But it’s a compact BEV! Still weighs 1759 Kg.

    • soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      Good luck defining what is and isn’t an SUV and try to enforce parking restrictions based on that.

      Companies will just define their own classes to avoid this unless there is a solid measurement in either dimension or weight. If it’s weight then they will be destroyed by the media for being anti-EV and if it’s size then the whole SUV argument goes out the window

      For example is Audi A8 not an SUV but Ford Puma is?

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        5 months ago

        Total outside dimensions. If it takes up more space than the typical economy car it pays the high tax. Since you seem a bit pedantic I will define it exactly:

        Take the vehicle and put it in water, use weights if needed to submerge it. Measure the displaced water. If that value is above that if a typical economy car it pays a higher tax. Economy car is defined as the what an average of a poll of randomly selected people defined it to be in 2024.

  • Marzanna@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Well. This makes no sense for me. How do SUVs deffer from other cars? They take only one parking lot and many SUVs are even smaller than an average car. Why not to rise parking costs for luxury cars?

    • xlash123@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      If you have the time (35 min), this video does a great job of explaining the distinction.

      https://youtu.be/jN7mSXMruEo

      If you have even more time, I recommending looking into Strong Towns, of which the same creator summarized in this series of videos: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJp5q-R0lZ0_FCUbeVWK6OGLN69ehUTVa

      This channel opened my eyes to the extremely terrible world of car dependency that we live in. I will warn you that once you know this, you will never see the world the same way again, but it’s extremely important that we know about this problems so that we can push our governments to fix them.

      • Marzanna@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        The key word here is “unnecessary” but in fact the circumstances make us use SUVs because of bad weather, bad roads (and even absence if roads), a lot of stuff to transfer (from furniture and fridges to bikes). For traveling SUVs and minivans are perfect. If I lived in a center of a city and/or I didn’t have to go to a countryside and I didn’t have relatives or friends (or I hated them) I’d considered buying a micro car! But in any other circumstances it would be a hatchback, SUV, minivan or even fully-fledged offroad truck. Considering what people around me are driving it’s mostly SUVs because it is an optimal car type. Even some carsharing cars and taxis are SUVs. That is why I’m surprised by these news about rising parking prices.

    • ChrisLicht@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Years ago, I heard an NPR piece about a French -ologist of some kind, who was revolutionizing advertising in the States, and he mentioned a small car that consumers viewed as saying “Rape me!” We are all driving around in jacked up station wagons, because of some weird, atavistic urges to feel inviolable and cosseted.

      Fundamentally, SUVs are an inefficient design for a passenger car. Even small crossovers, and I drive one myself, are inefficient relative to a station wagon offering the same volume and space for passengers and cargo.

      SUVs burn relatively more gas, they use more tires, they damage roads more, they are less controllable due to higher centers of gravity, they have poorer visibility of pedestrians and cyclists, and they require shitloads of engineering just to hide their shitty performance and safety characteristics.

      • Marzanna@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        The problem with station wagons is that they are too low. They can easily stuck in mud or snow and it’s easier to hit a rock or something. And about tires. I used the same set of tires for 11 years on my SUV. And modern cars are quite fuel efficient so there is no significant difference in fuel consumption anyways you don’t want an always fuel hungry monster and it’s better to consider mere efficient alternatives. Considering roads: well, in fact many roads are in quite bad condition so roads make damage to cars not vice versa :) And it’s always better to have bigger wheels and higher vehicle to avoid crushing into a big pothole. about safety: modern SUVs have safety measures like stabilization you are just supposed not to drive recklessly. SUVs have poorer visibility but it’s not that bad unless we are talking about american-style trucks. Of course I am saying all this thinking about average european SUV and they are abute the size of average sedan or hatchback or even smaller.