>Trade unions at the Louvre have denounced the policy as “shocking philosophically, socially and on a human level” and have called for strike action over the change, along with a raft of other complaints.
Why would a trade union strike against decisions that does not affect their workers – or any other workers in France or Europe?
I get why people would oppose the decision, but why is it *trade unions* taking action?
I would be kinda angry if my trade union was burning our war chest to fight this.
BringBackSoule on
It’s encountered worldwide. Happened to me in india.
NoNote7867 on
Again the poorest European countries citizens are being fucked over because “European” means only EU and rich non EU countries.
Nono6768 on
When I was in Egypt and Argentina, they charged triple for non nationals. If there’s no reciprocity I don’t see why we shouldn’t do the same. If you have money to come to Paris you have money to pay the museum
theErasmusStudent on
It’s the same in many other countries, instead of syaing that foreign (out of eu) tourists pay more we should say that locals get to enjoy for less
Valuable-Key5427 on
It is a normal practice in many countries. This money can be used to make Louvre safer place to store valuables and make the city of Paris overall more safe and attractive place to live.
DarraghDaraDaire on
The Louvre does not only get funding from ticket sales, it gets a large chunk of its budget from the French Ministry of Culture. The Ministry of Culture funding comes from French taxes and EU subsidies.
The argument for cheaper EU citizen tickets is that EU citizen taxes are already funding the museum.
vlatkovr on
I remember in India many many years ago I paid like 750 for the Taj Mahal. And it was like 20 for locals lol
Wise-Reflection-7400 on
This is quite dumb especially as by non-European they mean non-EU/single market member – so a political division.
It should be French citizens get in cheaper and everyone else pays more or keep it the same.
UncleZero on
That would be fine if they didn’t hold stolen property in the Louvre. Charge more for the actual French stuff, but all the “exotic” exhibitions should stay the same price (if not lower for people from countries that were pillaged by France)
Asrock23 on
I would prefer that they do it the other way around, that they lower prices for Europeans.
Muted-Aioli9206 on
This is a strategy usually taken by third-world countries where foreigners have wayyyyy more buying power than the locals.
12 commenti
>Trade unions at the Louvre have denounced the policy as “shocking philosophically, socially and on a human level” and have called for strike action over the change, along with a raft of other complaints.
Why would a trade union strike against decisions that does not affect their workers – or any other workers in France or Europe?
I get why people would oppose the decision, but why is it *trade unions* taking action?
I would be kinda angry if my trade union was burning our war chest to fight this.
It’s encountered worldwide. Happened to me in india.
Again the poorest European countries citizens are being fucked over because “European” means only EU and rich non EU countries.
When I was in Egypt and Argentina, they charged triple for non nationals. If there’s no reciprocity I don’t see why we shouldn’t do the same. If you have money to come to Paris you have money to pay the museum
It’s the same in many other countries, instead of syaing that foreign (out of eu) tourists pay more we should say that locals get to enjoy for less
It is a normal practice in many countries. This money can be used to make Louvre safer place to store valuables and make the city of Paris overall more safe and attractive place to live.
The Louvre does not only get funding from ticket sales, it gets a large chunk of its budget from the French Ministry of Culture. The Ministry of Culture funding comes from French taxes and EU subsidies.
The argument for cheaper EU citizen tickets is that EU citizen taxes are already funding the museum.
I remember in India many many years ago I paid like 750 for the Taj Mahal. And it was like 20 for locals lol
This is quite dumb especially as by non-European they mean non-EU/single market member – so a political division.
It should be French citizens get in cheaper and everyone else pays more or keep it the same.
That would be fine if they didn’t hold stolen property in the Louvre. Charge more for the actual French stuff, but all the “exotic” exhibitions should stay the same price (if not lower for people from countries that were pillaged by France)
I would prefer that they do it the other way around, that they lower prices for Europeans.
This is a strategy usually taken by third-world countries where foreigners have wayyyyy more buying power than the locals.