4 ms·

By and large, I prefer to live in a world with taxi and hotel regulation Why, exactly?

gaius 13y ago
Well, for a start, if you buy or rent an apartment in a nice quiet building, you didn't sign up for one of your neighbours deciding to run a hotel with strangers coming and going at all hours. Regulation prevents people getting profits by externalizing their costs onto others without their consent.
- atom-morgan 13y ago
  So the amount of foot traffic going in and out of my (quiet) apartment is the issue? I hope I'm not exceeding this limit already by myself especially since none of my neighbors know who I am. As for having my friends over, this is an issue as well?
  - gaius 13y ago
    "having your friends over" eh? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/17/airbnb-orgy_n_4978830.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/17/airbnb-orgy_n_49788...
    - atom-morgan 13y ago
      Yes, having my friends over. We talk, drink, play video games, code, etc. This one scenario necessitates regulation to punish all other people who use or would potentially use Airbnb/Lyft/Uber in a responsible and professional manner?
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- head_stomp 13y ago
  Why is this person renting or buying an apartment in a building whose management allows their residents to rent their apartments out like hotel rooms? Why can't this function through contracts with disputes being adjudicated through a court system rather than through comparatively blunt statutory regulation? For example, replace "run a hotel with strangers coming and going at all hours" with 'smoke cigarettes' or 'own a pet.'
  - gaius 13y ago
    The answer is, management usually doesn't allow this, and they flaunt the rules anyway. Which is why the guy in the story I posted below is getting evicted. And how many AirBnB types pay taxes on the income either?
    - head_stomp 13y ago
      My response is, statutory regulation usually doesn't allow this, and they flaunt the rules anyway. I don't see how statutory regulation solves the problem you're arguing it's supposed to. Is your concern that courts do not punish contract violators as harshly as those who violate statutory regulation? Or maybe that allowing different management policies places too great a burden on consumers? Alternatively, I can see why hotels would favor blunt statutory regulation and that anti-competition aspect of it is of concern to me. How many stay-at-home parents pay taxes on their income? Or would you be ok with AirBnB if payment mostly occurred through barter or a "gift economy?"
      - gaius 13y ago
        I'd be OK with it if the people who wanted to do it got the rules of their building association changed! Usually the residents would vote. Strange how that never seems to happen. The hotel regulation gives people who play by the rules they freely accepted when they move in a tool to use against those who flout them.
        head_stomp 13y ago
        Absolutely, it would be awesome if people utilized voluntary collective action rather than coercion or fraud to assert their preferences. But why create a new, coercive tool that carries additional negative consequences instead addressing the inability/inefficiency to deal with the problem through contracts and the courts? What do you think causes the inability/inefficiency? I can't help but get the impression that people think that issues can't be addressed without statutory regulation such that it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.
  - deleted 13y ago

gaius 13y ago

Well, for a start, if you buy or rent an apartment in a nice quiet building, you didn't sign up for one of your neighbours deciding to run a hotel with strangers coming and going at all hours. Regulation prevents people getting profits by externalizing their costs onto others without their consent.

atom-morgan 13y ago
So the amount of foot traffic going in and out of my (quiet) apartment is the issue? I hope I'm not exceeding this limit already by myself especially since none of my neighbors know who I am. As for having my friends over, this is an issue as well?
- gaius 13y ago
  "having your friends over" eh? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/17/airbnb-orgy_n_4978830.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/17/airbnb-orgy_n_49788...
  - atom-morgan 13y ago
    Yes, having my friends over. We talk, drink, play video games, code, etc. This one scenario necessitates regulation to punish all other people who use or would potentially use Airbnb/Lyft/Uber in a responsible and professional manner?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
head_stomp 13y ago
Why is this person renting or buying an apartment in a building whose management allows their residents to rent their apartments out like hotel rooms? Why can't this function through contracts with disputes being adjudicated through a court system rather than through comparatively blunt statutory regulation? For example, replace "run a hotel with strangers coming and going at all hours" with 'smoke cigarettes' or 'own a pet.'
- gaius 13y ago
  The answer is, management usually doesn't allow this, and they flaunt the rules anyway. Which is why the guy in the story I posted below is getting evicted. And how many AirBnB types pay taxes on the income either?
  - head_stomp 13y ago
    My response is, statutory regulation usually doesn't allow this, and they flaunt the rules anyway. I don't see how statutory regulation solves the problem you're arguing it's supposed to. Is your concern that courts do not punish contract violators as harshly as those who violate statutory regulation? Or maybe that allowing different management policies places too great a burden on consumers? Alternatively, I can see why hotels would favor blunt statutory regulation and that anti-competition aspect of it is of concern to me. How many stay-at-home parents pay taxes on their income? Or would you be ok with AirBnB if payment mostly occurred through barter or a "gift economy?"
    - gaius 13y ago
      I'd be OK with it if the people who wanted to do it got the rules of their building association changed! Usually the residents would vote. Strange how that never seems to happen. The hotel regulation gives people who play by the rules they freely accepted when they move in a tool to use against those who flout them.
      - head_stomp 13y ago
        Absolutely, it would be awesome if people utilized voluntary collective action rather than coercion or fraud to assert their preferences. But why create a new, coercive tool that carries additional negative consequences instead addressing the inability/inefficiency to deal with the problem through contracts and the courts? What do you think causes the inability/inefficiency? I can't help but get the impression that people think that issues can't be addressed without statutory regulation such that it becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy.
- deleted 13y ago