This is a silly argument[0], but for what is being discussed, what really counts is the average wealth per adult for which France does quite well at 11th (for median, 13th for mean)[1]:
[0] with respect to classifying countries as rich or not as it ignores the fact that the category is not fixed in size.
While I don't agree with the original discussion points, I don't think this counterpoint has much merit. While France may not be "one of the richest" verbatim, there's no denying France is a rich first-world country. In the list you linked to, it ranks 25 out of 187 by the IMF estimate and similarly in other listings.
This was not a counterpoint point at all. More like bike-shedding meets strawman.
There has not been any counterpoint to my comments yet, actually. My guess is because people have an emotional and ideological take on this: Cycling is good so giving money to fund repairs of bike has to be a positive measure as well. Except that it is not based on any economic or rational reasoning. I'm pretty certain that the only result will be to fund superfluous purchases or upgrades because that the standard effect of windfall subsidies.
How? they aren't even giving people the money. It's literally just for repairs. If anyone here is having an emotional/ideological take it would be you.
This is what makes it quite obvious that it won't do anything regarding uptake of cycling. It's a windfall, people will obviously be happy and may take the opportunity to upgrade to more expensive parts, but that's about it. If they needed repairs they would have had them done anyway.
This is a political measure that has no practical value.
There was a public transport strike in France recently and that caused an uptake in cycling.
I expect the same after the end of the lockdown because people may still be wary of public transport.
Not even in the top 20.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)...