4 ms·
What about arbitrary regulations that were designed to artificially limit supply and increase prices on customers and the fact that these regulations won't go a
by patrickaljord 9y ago
What about arbitrary regulations that were designed to artificially limit supply and increase prices on customers and the fact that these regulations won't go away because too few people know about them and there's a lobby giving millions to law makers to make sure they won't go away? How is that not corruption in anything but in name? How can Airbnb and others fight against these corrupt regulations when they were design to keep new comers and innovators out and incumbents in? It's a dirty game and if you want to play, or change things, you have to get dirty too. I'm glad they're doing it. Same as when you prohibit drug or alcool, it's still going to happen but way more dirty. Who's to blame though? Willing adults who want to partake peacefully in their preferred activities or regulators armed with guns trying to prevent from doing these peaceful things? Hm...
- dilemma 9y agoYou're talking about housing which is a business Airbnb is not in.
- ljw1001 9y agoIf anything, Airbnb is in the business of converting housing to hotel space. Many units are hosted by people who buy them to rent to tourists, reducing the housing stock.
- pille 9y agoAirbnb is a profit-seeking corporation, not a public interest group. They're not out to fight the good fight against "arbitrary regulation" any more than hotels are being evil by supporting it. If you don't like the law, you can vote, run for office, volunteer, donate to a candidate or nonprofit, or bother your elected officials. I'm no fan of lobbying ("corruption in anything but name"—sweetheart gigs for sympathetic representatives once they get out of office), but it's legal for AirBnb to do this too.
- patrickaljord 9y ago> They're not out to fight the good fight against "arbitrary regulation" any more than hotels are being evil by supporting it. They are actually in effect. > If you don't like the law, you can vote Sorry, I stopped believing in the Statist religion a while ago so this argument doesn't work on me. This is as effective to me as a religious person telling me "If you want things to improve just pray for it".
- lacampbell 9y agoIf you don't like the law, you can vote, run for office, volunteer, donate to a candidate or nonprofit, or bother your elected officials. In reality, you can do two things about it; 1. Like it 2. Absolutely nothing This myth that an honest individual with good intentions can somehow influence the system is harmful and needs to die. If you're not a huge corporation or lobby group, your chances of getting a law changed is for all intents and purposes zero.
- bigbugbag 9y agoAaron Schwartz, pipa and sopa.
- pille 9y agoI'd take the word "can" out of your first sentence, but I do agree with you in general. Airbnb, however, is a huge corporation with lots and lots of money. It's not a myth for them.
- idlewords 9y agoAn individual can most definitely influence the system, but it involves doing unappealing things like participating in open comment periods, political organizing, labor organizing, attending meetings, making phone calls, interacting with bureaucracies, pouring your life into standards bodies, running for local office, and persevering in the face of indifference and tedium. It's a high bar to clear (I certainly haven't cleared it), but to pretend it's impossible is the definition of cynisicm.
- dec0dedab0de 9y agoIgnoring the law is also an available option.
- flexie 9y agoAnd if everybody did that society would quickly spiral down into chaos.
- patrickaljord 9y agoYeah, a chaos ran by warlords that would force us to pay for their useless wars that would only enrich them and their friends, wait a second...
- maehwasu 9y ago> If you don't like the law, you can vote, run for office, volunteer, donate to a candidate or nonprofit, or bother your elected officials. You could do any of those things, or you could do things that...actually work?
- pille 9y agoI suppose DDOSing a law you disagree with is one approach. Seems pretty high-risk vs. the usual way of buying off the flyover congressmen for a couple grand a pop.
- rfrey 9y agoWhich regulations are you thinking of in your first sentence? In my view the limitation on use of residential units as hotel units simply recognizes the externalities involved - externalities that Airbnb hosts are now throwing into the commons and profiting from. Other regulations, like more stringent fire codes for hotels, signage to fire escapes, sprinkler systems etc. are paid for with blood, not lobbyists. You may have other regulations in mind though, that I don't know about.
- jancsika 9y agoI'm confused-- in which scope does the descriptor "artificially" operate? 1. The set of all arbitrary regulations which aim to limit supply. 2. The set of all arbitrary regulations which have the consequence of limiting supply. 3. The set of all arbitrary regulations which could conceivably have the consequence of limiting supply at any time in the future. 4. The set of all regulations which aim to limit supply. 5. The set of all regulations which have the consequence of limiting supply. 6. The set of all regulations which could conceivably have the consequence of limiting supply at any time in the future. 7. The set of all regulations. If it's #1 and only ever #1, I'm with you.