4 ms·

> It shouldn't be legal to tell someone who owns a home that they cannot rent it out. We're not talking about someone running a business out of their home, wher

> It shouldn't be legal to tell someone who owns a home that they cannot rent it out. We're not talking about someone running a business out of their home, where the zoning laws actually apply. Short term rentals are a business, by definition.

unethical_ban 10y ago
Parent made it sound like the government has a moral right to zoning laws. I would argue that zoning laws are more often abused than used properly.
- threeseed 10y ago
  The government does have a moral right to zoning laws. We, as citizens, have ascribed them that right. And it is what protects me from having my neighbours run a brothel or smelting plant in their house.
  - hilop 10y ago
    That's not a "right", that's a power struggle. What protects the brothel owner from being kicked out of town?
braveo 10y ago
subletting is legal, by your definition it would be a business and should be illegal. Your definition is wrong.
- 1_2__3 10y ago
  Subletting is not short term, and is rightly considered to be largely governed by the same laws as those that apply to rentals since the uses are so similar. I honestly do not understand the willful ignorance in this thread. Short term rentals is commerce. Everyone knows it's commerce. When you say you think it isn't (or you don't understand how it could be) you sound like you're denying the earth goes around the sun. This isn't even a particularly nuanced area of permitted use laws (zoning) or the appropriate role of government. You are all basically advocating for elimination of all zoning and/or pretending it doesn't exist as a totally normal type of regulation in the US (and all over the world).
  - braveo 10y ago
    Selling off my collection of stamps from my home or allowing my child to sell lemonade is also commerce, yet I am allowed to do it. This is where the original poster went off the rails. Just because there's an exchange of money does not mean these laws do, or should, apply.
    - spc476 10y ago
      And yes, authorities do shut down lemonade stands: https://www.google.com/search?q=authority+shut+down+lemonade+stand&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=authority+shut+down+lemonade... I think it's silly, but there it is.
      - braveo 10y ago
        right, someone has done it somewhere. I knew that when I made the comment, it doesn't change the general applicability of the point.
    - azernik 10y ago
      They're legal because the government has not decided to make them illegal. If the government decides that your lemonade stand is a danger to public health, or that your stamp collection is a national patrimony and cannot leave the country, it will make new laws that enforce those decisions.
      - Tempest1981 10y ago
        Or, they're illegal, but the law isn't enforced, so people feel they are legal.
    - 1_2__3 10y ago
      Of course they shut down lemonade stands. Especially if you tried to run a daily lemonade stand out of your front yard, staffed by people who don't live there.
DINKDINK 10y ago
By that definition so are long-term rentals, or even home buying and selling. A Colorado court has ruled that there's no substantive difference between a renter who rents for one month or one week.

unethical_ban 10y ago

Parent made it sound like the government has a moral right to zoning laws. I would argue that zoning laws are more often abused than used properly.

threeseed 10y ago
The government does have a moral right to zoning laws. We, as citizens, have ascribed them that right. And it is what protects me from having my neighbours run a brothel or smelting plant in their house.
- hilop 10y ago
  That's not a "right", that's a power struggle. What protects the brothel owner from being kicked out of town?

braveo 10y ago

subletting is legal, by your definition it would be a business and should be illegal. Your definition is wrong.

1_2__3 10y ago
Subletting is not short term, and is rightly considered to be largely governed by the same laws as those that apply to rentals since the uses are so similar. I honestly do not understand the willful ignorance in this thread. Short term rentals is commerce. Everyone knows it's commerce. When you say you think it isn't (or you don't understand how it could be) you sound like you're denying the earth goes around the sun. This isn't even a particularly nuanced area of permitted use laws (zoning) or the appropriate role of government. You are all basically advocating for elimination of all zoning and/or pretending it doesn't exist as a totally normal type of regulation in the US (and all over the world).
- braveo 10y ago
  Selling off my collection of stamps from my home or allowing my child to sell lemonade is also commerce, yet I am allowed to do it. This is where the original poster went off the rails. Just because there's an exchange of money does not mean these laws do, or should, apply.
  - spc476 10y ago
    And yes, authorities do shut down lemonade stands: https://www.google.com/search?q=authority+shut+down+lemonade+stand&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=authority+shut+down+lemonade... I think it's silly, but there it is.
    - braveo 10y ago
      right, someone has done it somewhere. I knew that when I made the comment, it doesn't change the general applicability of the point.
  - azernik 10y ago
    They're legal because the government has not decided to make them illegal. If the government decides that your lemonade stand is a danger to public health, or that your stamp collection is a national patrimony and cannot leave the country, it will make new laws that enforce those decisions.
    - Tempest1981 10y ago
      Or, they're illegal, but the law isn't enforced, so people feel they are legal.
  - 1_2__3 10y ago
    Of course they shut down lemonade stands. Especially if you tried to run a daily lemonade stand out of your front yard, staffed by people who don't live there.

DINKDINK 10y ago

By that definition so are long-term rentals, or even home buying and selling. A Colorado court has ruled that there's no substantive difference between a renter who rents for one month or one week.