It entirely depends on how the money is spent. If Paris is making investments that will enable it to substantially grow its tax base, it's a good prudent strategy, certainly better than the supposedly more fiscally responsible do-nothing strategy that can just as easily lead to financial ruin as irresponsible drunken-sailor spending.
> If Paris is making investments that will enable it to substantially grow its tax base
Obviously, this is not what they are doing, debts growing with quite high tax rises at the same time ("taxe fonciere" [property tax] doubled last year).
Paris is often depiected as a great model, especially by liberal foreign media, but the reality is rather different, and I believe that the Mayor's approval rating is currently abyssmal...
Not at all obvious. What is obvious is that returns on many investments, such as vastly improving housing and transportation for city residents, have multi-year lags. Like, obviously when you just spent billions on improving your RER, properly redesigning your streets to not be deadly by design anymore, and buying up housing, you'll be in the read that fiscal year.
>"taxe fonciere" [property tax] doubled last year
My French is rusty, but it was a 50% increase, it was previously the lowest of all cities in France, and it was not raised since 2011[0]. It is also peanuts compared to property taxes in Canada where I live, and especially compared to many parts of the US. Not an apples-to-apples comparison because property taxes pay for different things in different countries (i.e. in Canada provincial taxes pay for schools, in the US it comes out of your municipal property taxes). But still, we're not talking about one of the main taxes for an average French citizen, clearly.
You highlighted no facts, actually. The one fact was off by a factor of 2 and missing all context. What you call "nitpicking" is in fact the process of forming an opinion using facts and context. You could offer valuable insights, presumably being a Parisian, but instead you switch topics to beggars and crime. Oh well.
Debts ballooning and tax skyrocketing are facts. Everything I wrote are facts except of a small error in number but of course you chose to argue that the tax rise was 50% not 100% like if that made a difference to the point.
As I mentioned, rose-tinted glasses can be very strong, especially in people who have no insight but are looking for ideological reinforcement because, frankly, articles about how great Paris is in the NYT only serve that purpose, the readers will not know a thing about the actual situation.
