5 ms·

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 sho

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.
  - hunterloftis 11y ago
    Fine, you don't want neighbors. This is probably true of many people who choose to live in "full-time hotels in Asia." Many people move to residential zones because they are interested in having neighbors, and they are understandably perturbed when an entity encourages law-breaking behavior that destroys their neighborhood.
    - aianus 11y ago
      The article is about SF and NYC. People live for years in residential neighborhoods in SF and NYC without befriending their neighbors. Anyways, having transients for neighbors actually reduces your risk (variance) with respect to your neighbors. Any given day you're likely to have a normal respectful neighbor. If they're not, they'll soon be gone. Whereas with permanent neighbors you're stuck with them for a long time if they're inconsiderate assholes.
      - hunterloftis 11y ago
        So your opinion is that people who want neighbors should consider seeing random strangers next door an improvement over people with whom they can develop long-term relationships? > People live for years in residential neighborhoods in SF and NYC without befriending their neighbors. The data doesn't back this up. In fact, NYC and SF are two of the best places to befriend neighbors based on the shared walkable living areas that are rare in most US cities. Here's a recent article on the phenomenon: - http://www.vox.com/2015/10/28/9622920/housing-adult-friendship http://www.vox.com/2015/10/28/9622920/housing-adult-friendsh...
wavefunction 11y ago
I wonder if you have traveled to other parts of the world where there is "no zoning" and seen the reality of those places? I'm not talking about situations with some sort of theoretical Libertarian solution to tragedies of the commons but the reality on the ground. Zoning laws were a reaction to the situations arising from a state devoid of zoning. I assume and have confirmed in my opinion that they are a good solution to those problems, if not always implemented in an optimal fashion or twisted through the actions of special interests. You can of course claim that there are no problems arising from a lack of zoning and that the introduction of zoning laws is purely political in nature rather than functionally positive for society as a whole, but I'd like to see some real-world evidence rather than philosophy or assertions of opinion as fact.
- guard-of-terra 11y ago
  European historic cities are usually very mixed. Shops, malls, hotels, churches and houses blended together, and it's a really nice environment. Post-communist cities are usually not zoned. They are a result of planning but after that they had time to get mixed and indeed they are. If bland.

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.
- hunterloftis 11y ago
  Fine, you don't want neighbors. This is probably true of many people who choose to live in "full-time hotels in Asia." Many people move to residential zones because they are interested in having neighbors, and they are understandably perturbed when an entity encourages law-breaking behavior that destroys their neighborhood.
  - aianus 11y ago
    The article is about SF and NYC. People live for years in residential neighborhoods in SF and NYC without befriending their neighbors. Anyways, having transients for neighbors actually reduces your risk (variance) with respect to your neighbors. Any given day you're likely to have a normal respectful neighbor. If they're not, they'll soon be gone. Whereas with permanent neighbors you're stuck with them for a long time if they're inconsiderate assholes.
    - hunterloftis 11y ago
      So your opinion is that people who want neighbors should consider seeing random strangers next door an improvement over people with whom they can develop long-term relationships? > People live for years in residential neighborhoods in SF and NYC without befriending their neighbors. The data doesn't back this up. In fact, NYC and SF are two of the best places to befriend neighbors based on the shared walkable living areas that are rare in most US cities. Here's a recent article on the phenomenon: - http://www.vox.com/2015/10/28/9622920/housing-adult-friendship http://www.vox.com/2015/10/28/9622920/housing-adult-friendsh...

wavefunction 11y ago

I wonder if you have traveled to other parts of the world where there is "no zoning" and seen the reality of those places? I'm not talking about situations with some sort of theoretical Libertarian solution to tragedies of the commons but the reality on the ground. Zoning laws were a reaction to the situations arising from a state devoid of zoning. I assume and have confirmed in my opinion that they are a good solution to those problems, if not always implemented in an optimal fashion or twisted through the actions of special interests. You can of course claim that there are no problems arising from a lack of zoning and that the introduction of zoning laws is purely political in nature rather than functionally positive for society as a whole, but I'd like to see some real-world evidence rather than philosophy or assertions of opinion as fact.

guard-of-terra 11y ago
European historic cities are usually very mixed. Shops, malls, hotels, churches and houses blended together, and it's a really nice environment. Post-communist cities are usually not zoned. They are a result of planning but after that they had time to get mixed and indeed they are. If bland.