I wonder if they will rebuild the roof sub-structure out of wood, duplicating the historical construction methods ... or out of modern fire-retardant materials? This would seem to be a crucial decision & no doubt will become the subject of much discussion & disagreement.
The Reims cathedral (detroyed by germans during WWI) has been rebuilt without the wooden frame, and nobody notice. Since it's not visible, destroyed, and is archived by books, photos and video, my view is i don't really see the point of rebuilding it like original.
Discussion and disagreement already started indeed, with a clear conservatives/progressives battle looming.
I hope a touch of modernity, embracing the idea that this civilization is living, will be added. As it has been in the past, and as these two architects imagined with a Notre-Dame glass roof.
The Eiffel Tower, then seen as an horror by many Parisians, has almost been dismantled shortly after construction.
The Louvre glass pyramid (1988) raised a heated debate too, but a few decades later, it's just a natural part of it.
Pretty sure there’s statistics out there that show the wealthy do pay a large percentage of taxes.
There is data about tax evasion too. It's estimated to at least 25 billions euros / year.
This is a building fire which burned a roof, and will be fixed in five years, with no loss of life or property beyond the small portion of the building itself.
Not to arg about your point, but i'm afraid there's a bit more work than that: the stone used in the building structure (Pierre de Paris) is made of limestone, which is internally affected by both heat and water. Urgent work has been done in the last two days to prevent walls from collapsing at first windy condition - luck here was the excellent weather (no kidding, at the second i'm writing this, i'm hearing thunder). And there are three big holes in the stone arches. Some tainted glass are missing. 300 tons of lead melted and may have made the site toxic.
NB: Indeed, "sad" weather forecast on TV