2 ms·
It does, both in the title here, and in the article's title. "Only" is clear, and "All that's done so far is make hotels more expensive" from the article title
by b112 2y ago
It does, both in the title here, and in the article's title. "Only" is clear, and "All that's done so far is make hotels more expensive" from the article title, is also exceptionally clear.
- solardev 2y agoI don't think this is the strength of evidence you seem to think it is. I would like to see some actual data and analysis, not just a throwaway clickbait headline.
- b112 2y agoAt no point did I say it was evidence. I did say the article spoke to it. Something the post I directly replied to showed confusion about.
- fny 2y agoThe article’s premise is flawed. Banning Airbnbs obviously won’t reduce housing costs; rather, it aims to prevent even further price increases. One study confirms this link[0], but it’s unclear whether the effect size is meaningful. [0]: https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/09.05.2019-Proserpio-Davide-Paper.pdf https://marketing.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/...
- solardev 2y agoThank you!
- chermi 2y agoWhy is it obvious getting rid of Airbnb won't reduce housing costs? All else being equal, it could increase supply if the hosts are holding on to them only for renting. Increase supply = reduce cost, no? Edit, and by cheaper, I mean less than they would be otherwise. Maybe that's the confusion I'm having.
- morsch 2y agoStrictly speaking, the word "only" isn't in the original title (it was editorialized to fit the character limit). And the article barely discusses the effect on housing costs, this is the one paragraph devoted to it and it comes down to "further research needed": But Airbnb and other critics say the near-ban won't do much to address the housing crisis and will hurt homeowners who relied on the rental income and visitors who couldn't afford sky-high hotel costs. There is a slew of factors — including new housing construction and migration patterns — that impact housing costs and vacancy rates. But there's some evidence, including from Irvine, California, that restricting short-term rentals can reduce rents. It's not clear how much of a role LL18 has played so far in changing these conditions.
- b112 2y agoStrictly speaking, the word "only" isn't in the original title. I listed two title snippets, said which was from the article, and said one was from here. That's exceptionally clear. From what I replied to: Well, ok, hotels are more expensive now, but are houses and long term rentals any cheaper? Was the ban successful at improving housing affordability for the people who live there? These questions are answered, as I specifed, by the title. You.may not like the lack of detail, but that was not the criticism I responded to. The title says "no, not cheaper".
- morsch 2y agoThat is what the article's author seems to think, but they give zero evidence for it. The criticism you responded to was The article doesn't seem to discuss that at all. -- and it doesn't. All it does is concede ignorance on the topic.
- b112 2y agoBut it does discuss it, it says "No". OP would have been more prudent, if that was the real question, to say "Provides no evidence". It's OK for an article to focus on one thing, in this case, hotel pricing.
- jjj123 2y agoWould it have been clearer to you if the OP said “article body” instead? Because that’s how I interpreted their comment.