4 ms·
Strictly 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
by morsch 2y ago
Strictly 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.