There is a major difference between Airbnb and Uber/Taxi. One has a relatively fixed supply (real estate), the other has a virtually unlimited supply (cars).

There is a major difference between Airbnb and Uber/Taxi. One has a relatively fixed supply (real estate), the other has a virtually unlimited supply (cars). Airbnb introduces a new layer of demand to apartments and houses, which traditionally were only demanded by long-term residents, it has completely shaken up the market. This is especially true in cities with a busy tourism industry. So while the supply is mostly the same, the demand has measurably increased, the price will clearly be impacted. To argue otherwise is akin to denying the fundamentals of economics. I understand the view where you say, let people use their property the way they want. However, at the same time, if we acknowledge that rents are increasing due to a new market for short term rentals, then we must also acknowledge that this increase in pricing pushes a certain percentage of locals out of real estate that they would otherwise be able to afford. In a city like Des Moines, Iowa, the effect of the short term rental market is going to be minimal. Plenty of space, very little tourism, rents already quite low. But when you go somewhere like NYC, SF, Paris, Barcelona, etc. then the impact of short term tourism rentals has a major impact. Millions of people visit these cities every year, and suddenly they are in direct competition with locals for real estate. Now why is it a problem if locals are priced out? That's much more a matter of opinion. But the clear reasons are that locals create deeper bonds with the area and people around them. Locals have more reason to respect the area. Locals are interested in building a community around them. Tourists are basically just ticking off a bucket list of typical activities and are on their way.