4 ms·

Article's author seems to defend problems rather than acknowledge their solutions. "it comes from professional landlords who are removing badly needed housing

Article's author seems to defend problems rather than acknowledge their solutions. "it comes from professional landlords who are removing badly needed housing from the local market and making it available exclusively for tourists" Since when in modern society should commercial entities care about what is "badly needed" instead of where profit lies? Since when it's not only politicans need to pretend to care about "regular people", but commercial property owners? "That’s true of regular hotels as well, but usually they exist in areas that have been zoned for such activity" This seems to be the root of problem. Zoning is a socialist measure. It will create all kinds of shortages. The whole article reads to me like this: We've implemented this zoning measure that we knew would cause problems. And by golly it did! Now we're trying to blame these problems on all kinds of commercial entities. Make them fix things for us that we knew would arise. And we also want more regulations to fix problems caused by having regulations in the first place.

mistersquid 11y ago
You seem purposely to miss some of the points of Steven Hill's very even-handed analysis which is that some AirBnB operators are turning residential zones into commercial hotel zones by having multiple listings and this causes conflicts for 1) residents who find commercial activity in and around their homes , 2) municipalities deprived of tax revenue, 3) guests who find themselves in units that do no have adequate safety protections let alone commercial insurance. This is especially problematic given that in LA, SF, and NYC AirBnB makes a large fraction (~44%) of its revenue from commercial operators with multiple listings. That is, in these markets nearly half of AirBnB "hosts" are entrepreneurs who are flouting municipal law and obligations for their personal gain and to others' detriments. Hill offers a few common sense (and in my opinion equitable) actions AirBnB might take to make amends. In a passage worth quoting in context, Hill writes > Perhaps the biggest tragedy in all this is that at the core of Airbnb is a really good idea. It has cleverly used Web- and app-based technology to bust open a global market that connects tourists with financially strapped homeowners. After interviewing some of Airbnb’s “regular-people” hosts, I’m convinced that this service legitimately does help them make ends meet. > But by taking such a hands-off, laissez-faire attitude toward the professionalization of hosting by greedy commercial landlords and multiproperty agents, Airbnb has become its own worst enemy. As the number of victims piles up, it undermines its own “sharing and trust” ethos because Airbnb could easily meet cities halfway: > • With one stroke of the computer mouse, Airbnb could “evict the evictors” — de-list from its website any professional landlords or property managers operating multiple properties as tourist hotels. It has the data and knows who they are. > • Cooperate with cities like San Francisco, Santa Monica, and Portland, which require hosts to register with local agencies, by de-listing any unregistered hosts. > • Pay the same hotel occupancy taxes that hotels pay in all 34,000 cities in which Airbnb operates, or collect them from the hosts and turn them over to the cities. > • Stop refusing to supply the data that cities need to enforce regulations and taxation, including the number of rental nights and rates charged by each host. EDIT: Remove markup. Readability. Grammar.
- guard-of-terra 11y ago
  I think that zones are the problem. There should not be residential zones. There should not be commercial zones. There should just be the city. Or else you should be ready for consequences: shortages of one thing after another, people turning sour, inadequate pricing. 1) I don't see why one would at the same time expect to live in a heart of dynamic, rich and important city and be shielded from reality. Yes, if you live in a shared building you may find a brothel, drug pusher store, or AirBNB rental next door. Call the police if they behave. Cope otherwise, or move to suburbs. This may sound unfair if you expect otherwise, but those expectations are unrealistic. 2) But they don't talk about tax, they talk about banning. Taxing is a thing they can do. Just write a law clear enough that it would explicitly cover AirBNB, with clear understanding how this tax should work. Then force it out of AirBNB, suing if needed. Of course, some of individual lenders will go grey (for example, exchanging money outside of AirBNB's sight), but so can do hotels. 3) I don't see why short term rented flat would need more safety protections than regular flat. Pass adequate laws. Don't ever start talking about banning something. That is what you should do.
  - mrchicity 11y ago
    Zoning regulations deal with a classic "tragedy of the commons" problem. Nobody wants to live next to transients, but each person individually benefits from renting their property to them while they're away on business or vacation. If everyone agrees not to do this, and the rule is enforced, they are all better off. If you believe this is just a "socialist" thing, what about commercial contract agreements between property owners in a co-op? Should they be allowed to all agree to not engage in short-term rentals? Many condo and co-op board contracts have provisions for this, not enforced by some maladaptive government, but by negotiations between equals. It's a common desire and short-term renters aren't a protected class.
    - aianus 11y ago
      > Nobody wants to live next to transients, but each person individually benefits from renting their property to them while they're away on business or vacation. I've lived in actual full-time hotels in Asia for months at a time and never encountered any of these "transient" problems people keep whining about. Maybe once a month there was some noise at night. And these weren't high-end hotels either.

mistersquid 11y ago

You seem purposely to miss some of the points of Steven Hill's very even-handed analysis which is that some AirBnB operators are turning residential zones into commercial hotel zones by having multiple listings and this causes conflicts for 1) residents who find commercial activity in and around their homes , 2) municipalities deprived of tax revenue, 3) guests who find themselves in units that do no have adequate safety protections let alone commercial insurance. This is especially problematic given that in LA, SF, and NYC AirBnB makes a large fraction (~44%) of its revenue from commercial operators with multiple listings. That is, in these markets nearly half of AirBnB "hosts" are entrepreneurs who are flouting municipal law and obligations for their personal gain and to others' detriments. Hill offers a few common sense (and in my opinion equitable) actions AirBnB might take to make amends. In a passage worth quoting in context, Hill writes > Perhaps the biggest tragedy in all this is that at the core of Airbnb is a really good idea. It has cleverly used Web- and app-based technology to bust open a global market that connects tourists with financially strapped homeowners. After interviewing some of Airbnb’s “regular-people” hosts, I’m convinced that this service legitimately does help them make ends meet. > But by taking such a hands-off, laissez-faire attitude toward the professionalization of hosting by greedy commercial landlords and multiproperty agents, Airbnb has become its own worst enemy. As the number of victims piles up, it undermines its own “sharing and trust” ethos because Airbnb could easily meet cities halfway: > • With one stroke of the computer mouse, Airbnb could “evict the evictors” — de-list from its website any professional landlords or property managers operating multiple properties as tourist hotels. It has the data and knows who they are. > • Cooperate with cities like San Francisco, Santa Monica, and Portland, which require hosts to register with local agencies, by de-listing any unregistered hosts. > • Pay the same hotel occupancy taxes that hotels pay in all 34,000 cities in which Airbnb operates, or collect them from the hosts and turn them over to the cities. > • Stop refusing to supply the data that cities need to enforce regulations and taxation, including the number of rental nights and rates charged by each host. EDIT: Remove markup. Readability. Grammar.

guard-of-terra 11y ago
I think that zones are the problem. There should not be residential zones. There should not be commercial zones. There should just be the city. Or else you should be ready for consequences: shortages of one thing after another, people turning sour, inadequate pricing. 1) I don't see why one would at the same time expect to live in a heart of dynamic, rich and important city and be shielded from reality. Yes, if you live in a shared building you may find a brothel, drug pusher store, or AirBNB rental next door. Call the police if they behave. Cope otherwise, or move to suburbs. This may sound unfair if you expect otherwise, but those expectations are unrealistic. 2) But they don't talk about tax, they talk about banning. Taxing is a thing they can do. Just write a law clear enough that it would explicitly cover AirBNB, with clear understanding how this tax should work. Then force it out of AirBNB, suing if needed. Of course, some of individual lenders will go grey (for example, exchanging money outside of AirBNB's sight), but so can do hotels. 3) I don't see why short term rented flat would need more safety protections than regular flat. Pass adequate laws. Don't ever start talking about banning something. That is what you should do.
- mrchicity 11y ago
  Zoning regulations deal with a classic "tragedy of the commons" problem. Nobody wants to live next to transients, but each person individually benefits from renting their property to them while they're away on business or vacation. If everyone agrees not to do this, and the rule is enforced, they are all better off. If you believe this is just a "socialist" thing, what about commercial contract agreements between property owners in a co-op? Should they be allowed to all agree to not engage in short-term rentals? Many condo and co-op board contracts have provisions for this, not enforced by some maladaptive government, but by negotiations between equals. It's a common desire and short-term renters aren't a protected class.
  - aianus 11y ago
    > Nobody wants to live next to transients, but each person individually benefits from renting their property to them while they're away on business or vacation. I've lived in actual full-time hotels in Asia for months at a time and never encountered any of these "transient" problems people keep whining about. Maybe once a month there was some noise at night. And these weren't high-end hotels either.