7 ms·

Right... so Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's campaign contributors last election? http://www.followthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate.phtml?c=1357

by jval 13y ago

Right... so Attorney General Eric Schneiderman's campaign contributors last election? http://www.followthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate.phtml?c=135707 http://www.followthemoney.org/database/StateGlance/candidate... At number 4 with 1.58% of total campaign moneys, East 103rd Street Realty. Parent corporation: Glenwood Real Estate Corp. http://www.glenwoodnyc.com/properties/ http://www.glenwoodnyc.com/properties/ "Luxury Apartment Rentals in New York City" Obviously the fact that people are renting their apartments is not something that buildings are capable of managing for themselves and has become a matter of great importance to the entire state of New York.

rayiner 13y ago
That's just shocking ad hominem, and very bad ad hominem at that. So the parent company of the company that contributed less than 2% to this guy's election campaign offers luxury apartment rentals? Call the presses! Seriously, your naked aspersion doesn't even make sense in this context. AirBnB isn't competing with luxury apartment rentals. To the extent that a luxury apartment rental company might be interested in the issue, it's because they're worried about the impact on them if their tenants or the tenants of neighboring buildings start treating their properties as hotels through AirBnB. That concern is a totally valid one as a property owner.
- selmnoo 13y ago
  I agree with the larger point you're making, but one nitpick: > AirBnB isn't competing with luxury apartment rentals. Have you seen some of the houses listed on AirBnB? There are some that ask like $3000 per night. Luxury apartment rentals have all the right reasons to be worried here.
  - Xylakant 13y ago
    > Luxury apartment rentals have all the right reasons to be worried here. I doubt that. AirBnB is in the "give me an apartment for a short-term stay" market while luxury apartment rentals are more in the "I'd like to rent an apartment for living" market. Judging from a quick lock on the website, Glenwood Real Estate Corp doesn't want to go in the short-term rental market either.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    > There are some that ask like $3000 per night. Luxury apartment rentals have all the right reasons to be worried here. That seems to me to be more of a competitor to luxury hotel rentals. Luxury apartment buildings don't rent per night (and many don't rent on terms shorter than say six months or even a year). Indeed, one of the things renters of luxury apartments look for is a lack of short-term or hotel rentals. To the extent apartment buildings are in competition with AirBnB, it's from people leasing out their condos for 6-12+ months. Can you even do that on AirBnB?
- jval 13y ago
  To be fair, I think this is a perfectly legitimate ad hominem attack which I've phrased in the least exaggerated way possible. In politics, we have to question not only whether a prosecution is just but whether it is brought in the interests of the public or to further a private interest. That's why the interest registers are public. I stated the facts as they were and didn't embellish it at all (I could have easily written 'his fourth largest contributor is a Luxury Apartment Rentals Company!') because I'm not trying to suggest that he is some how 'in the pocket' of Glenwood. I didn't even go down the list of campaign contributors to see whether there were others (which I'm sure there are, and just looking quickly the next donor on the Real Estate list is East 46th Realty which is also owned by Glenwood). What I'm trying to suggest is that like all of America's politicians, he is under the influence of lobbyists and the reason he is taking this issue seriously is because people with money have put it on his radar. The luxury apartment rentals market is under threat from Airbnb. I'm just about to do a 3 month rental in NYC and some of the apartments available are amazing (often costing thousands of dollars per night - clearly out of my price range but not for others). If the luxury rental companies are worried about other people in the building using AirBnB, that suggests that the same apartments they are leasing are available on AirBnB. I can't think of a scenario where lost profits isn't a huge issue for these guys. I get what you're saying, and I agree that in any event the state always wants to help property owners who pay most of the taxes. But I think a measure as broad reaching as this is something that is designed primarily to intimidate users of the platform. If the state were serious about the tax collection aspect it would just force AirBnB to calculate and collect the hotels tax, not seize data and selectively prosecute its users. People aren't going to run through the laws in their head and question what the State is trying to achieve. They are just going to get scared when they hear the State is seizing AirBnB data and stop using AirBnB. I'm not suggesting that this is some kind of grand conspiracy, I'm suggesting that it is just business as usual in the USA.
flexie 13y ago
There is something deeply concerning about a criminal justice system in which prosecutors are elected politicians but in this particular case I highly doubt that the $40,000 or 1.58 percent matters much for this Schneiderman's decisions. Also, AirBnB is not competing on long term luxury apartment rentals so I don't see the connection.
- JackFr 13y ago
  The AG of New York hasn't been appointed since the before the Revolution. Prior to 1847 he was elected by the legislature since then the people. Why is an elected prosecutor worse than one appointed by an elected executive? There seems to be great concern about elected officials being corrupted but there aren't a lot of great alternatives.
  - tanzam75 13y ago
    Why not have prosecutors be civil servants, as in most civil law countries?
danielweber 13y ago
1.58%? That's it? How does it compare to Spitzer raising a bunch of money from Wall Street firms while chasing a bunch of other Wall Street firms?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
Xylakant 13y ago
Or blatant tax avoidance and disregard for building code and hotel regulations is a matter of importance for the state of New York. It may seem all outdated to us global internet citizens, but a lot of those old-fashioned real-world rules evolved because there was a problem. That's not to say that all rules in their current incarnation are sensible and well applicable to the current state of affairs, but participation in the law system is not voluntary - you don't get to opt out just because you think it's unjust.
- 27182818284 13y ago
  >That's not to say that all rules in their current incarnation are sensible We should be having that debate rather than shooting first and asking questions later.
  - Xylakant 13y ago
    Well, sure. But it's not like that AirBnB was coming forward and discussing health and fire code implications or taxing problems with the service they created with the local authorities. AirBnB basically pushes that burden down to the host - most of whom will not read or obey the advice hidden in the FAQ. Also, I sincerely doubt that the IRS will be very forthcoming to discuss whether the current taxation rules are sensible or not with someone who's charged with avoiding taxes. I understand that solving the problem is partially out of scope for AirBnB but so far they've been taking the easy route by ignoring and denying the problem. Reminds me of the mess über had at its hand when complaining about the taxi regulations in stockholm.
  - chimeracoder 13y ago
    But that's not the place of the legislature (or a judge), not the AG. I realize that in practice this happens, but we set a dangerous precedent when we allow the Attorney General to decide what should and should not be prosecuted. In theory, the Attorney General prosecutes all perceived violations of the law[0], and it's up to the justice system to, well, decide of the law is just. [0] And I don't think anybody's debating that this violates the law; the debate is whether or not the law is just.
parennoob 13y ago
Sorry, but as someone who originally comes from a largely corrupt third world country, this sounds like a case of institutionalized corruption to me. Why is the Attorney General an elected official anyway? You would think members of the judiciary would be either elected from amongst themselves or appointed by the executive, but direct election seems to open the door to a raft of opportunities to pander to your campaign contributors' interests. And this is not even considering the load of indirect kickbacks that candidates could be getting - club memberships, admission to selective schools for their children, spots on company boards, etc.

by jval 13y ago

rayiner 13y ago

That's just shocking ad hominem, and very bad ad hominem at that. So the parent company of the company that contributed less than 2% to this guy's election campaign offers luxury apartment rentals? Call the presses! Seriously, your naked aspersion doesn't even make sense in this context. AirBnB isn't competing with luxury apartment rentals. To the extent that a luxury apartment rental company might be interested in the issue, it's because they're worried about the impact on them if their tenants or the tenants of neighboring buildings start treating their properties as hotels through AirBnB. That concern is a totally valid one as a property owner.

selmnoo 13y ago
I agree with the larger point you're making, but one nitpick: > AirBnB isn't competing with luxury apartment rentals. Have you seen some of the houses listed on AirBnB? There are some that ask like $3000 per night. Luxury apartment rentals have all the right reasons to be worried here.
- Xylakant 13y ago
  > Luxury apartment rentals have all the right reasons to be worried here. I doubt that. AirBnB is in the "give me an apartment for a short-term stay" market while luxury apartment rentals are more in the "I'd like to rent an apartment for living" market. Judging from a quick lock on the website, Glenwood Real Estate Corp doesn't want to go in the short-term rental market either.
- rayiner 13y ago
  > There are some that ask like $3000 per night. Luxury apartment rentals have all the right reasons to be worried here. That seems to me to be more of a competitor to luxury hotel rentals. Luxury apartment buildings don't rent per night (and many don't rent on terms shorter than say six months or even a year). Indeed, one of the things renters of luxury apartments look for is a lack of short-term or hotel rentals. To the extent apartment buildings are in competition with AirBnB, it's from people leasing out their condos for 6-12+ months. Can you even do that on AirBnB?
jval 13y ago
To be fair, I think this is a perfectly legitimate ad hominem attack which I've phrased in the least exaggerated way possible. In politics, we have to question not only whether a prosecution is just but whether it is brought in the interests of the public or to further a private interest. That's why the interest registers are public. I stated the facts as they were and didn't embellish it at all (I could have easily written 'his fourth largest contributor is a Luxury Apartment Rentals Company!') because I'm not trying to suggest that he is some how 'in the pocket' of Glenwood. I didn't even go down the list of campaign contributors to see whether there were others (which I'm sure there are, and just looking quickly the next donor on the Real Estate list is East 46th Realty which is also owned by Glenwood). What I'm trying to suggest is that like all of America's politicians, he is under the influence of lobbyists and the reason he is taking this issue seriously is because people with money have put it on his radar. The luxury apartment rentals market is under threat from Airbnb. I'm just about to do a 3 month rental in NYC and some of the apartments available are amazing (often costing thousands of dollars per night - clearly out of my price range but not for others). If the luxury rental companies are worried about other people in the building using AirBnB, that suggests that the same apartments they are leasing are available on AirBnB. I can't think of a scenario where lost profits isn't a huge issue for these guys. I get what you're saying, and I agree that in any event the state always wants to help property owners who pay most of the taxes. But I think a measure as broad reaching as this is something that is designed primarily to intimidate users of the platform. If the state were serious about the tax collection aspect it would just force AirBnB to calculate and collect the hotels tax, not seize data and selectively prosecute its users. People aren't going to run through the laws in their head and question what the State is trying to achieve. They are just going to get scared when they hear the State is seizing AirBnB data and stop using AirBnB. I'm not suggesting that this is some kind of grand conspiracy, I'm suggesting that it is just business as usual in the USA.

flexie 13y ago

There is something deeply concerning about a criminal justice system in which prosecutors are elected politicians but in this particular case I highly doubt that the $40,000 or 1.58 percent matters much for this Schneiderman's decisions. Also, AirBnB is not competing on long term luxury apartment rentals so I don't see the connection.

JackFr 13y ago
The AG of New York hasn't been appointed since the before the Revolution. Prior to 1847 he was elected by the legislature since then the people. Why is an elected prosecutor worse than one appointed by an elected executive? There seems to be great concern about elected officials being corrupted but there aren't a lot of great alternatives.
- tanzam75 13y ago
  Why not have prosecutors be civil servants, as in most civil law countries?

danielweber 13y ago

1.58%? That's it? How does it compare to Spitzer raising a bunch of money from Wall Street firms while chasing a bunch of other Wall Street firms?

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

Xylakant 13y ago

Or blatant tax avoidance and disregard for building code and hotel regulations is a matter of importance for the state of New York. It may seem all outdated to us global internet citizens, but a lot of those old-fashioned real-world rules evolved because there was a problem. That's not to say that all rules in their current incarnation are sensible and well applicable to the current state of affairs, but participation in the law system is not voluntary - you don't get to opt out just because you think it's unjust.

27182818284 13y ago
>That's not to say that all rules in their current incarnation are sensible We should be having that debate rather than shooting first and asking questions later.
- Xylakant 13y ago
  Well, sure. But it's not like that AirBnB was coming forward and discussing health and fire code implications or taxing problems with the service they created with the local authorities. AirBnB basically pushes that burden down to the host - most of whom will not read or obey the advice hidden in the FAQ. Also, I sincerely doubt that the IRS will be very forthcoming to discuss whether the current taxation rules are sensible or not with someone who's charged with avoiding taxes. I understand that solving the problem is partially out of scope for AirBnB but so far they've been taking the easy route by ignoring and denying the problem. Reminds me of the mess über had at its hand when complaining about the taxi regulations in stockholm.
- chimeracoder 13y ago
  But that's not the place of the legislature (or a judge), not the AG. I realize that in practice this happens, but we set a dangerous precedent when we allow the Attorney General to decide what should and should not be prosecuted. In theory, the Attorney General prosecutes all perceived violations of the law[0], and it's up to the justice system to, well, decide of the law is just. [0] And I don't think anybody's debating that this violates the law; the debate is whether or not the law is just.

parennoob 13y ago

Sorry, but as someone who originally comes from a largely corrupt third world country, this sounds like a case of institutionalized corruption to me. Why is the Attorney General an elected official anyway? You would think members of the judiciary would be either elected from amongst themselves or appointed by the executive, but direct election seems to open the door to a raft of opportunities to pander to your campaign contributors' interests. And this is not even considering the load of indirect kickbacks that candidates could be getting - club memberships, admission to selective schools for their children, spots on company boards, etc.