I liked the article but as Simon implies some North Americans may
sentimentalise European cities somewhat.
From the article in question:
>Just as important, Paris exists within a legislative and economic
>framework that has allowed it to maintain and improve its
>infrastructure. Every French taxpayer spends the equivalent of $75
>annually on its upkeep.
Hmm, at the expense of other cities or what?
I wonder what exactly is meant by this. Is there a direct upfront
$75 demanded in black and white on every taxpayers account 'For the
upkeep of Paris' or is this some computation of the French state
subsidy to the capital city?
London is often described as a great city-not in quite with the same
kind of affection bestowed on Paris of course, but its predominance
is resented by the nation's majority who live in other cities in
the UK. I would have thought many French must feel the same way
about Paris. If the British Government were to demand $75 per head
for the upkeep of London they would get short shrift from the
nations taxpayers already underwhelmed by the capital's overblown
self-importance, the manner in which it's already subsidised and
favoured by national planning polies to the detriment of provincial
towns and cities .