4 ms·

Portland had just become the first city to explicitly allow short-term rentals through Airbnb and other sites, and welcoming Uber could help build the city’s sh

by glup 11y ago

Portland had just become the first city to explicitly allow short-term rentals through Airbnb and other sites, and welcoming Uber could help build the city’s sharing-economy brand, a logical extension of its communitarian roots. "Sharing economy" is by no means "an extension of communitarian roots". Communitarian is where the utility you derive is in part a function of the utility derived by others in your community. The "sharing" economy is where companies provide a service so you can buy or sell things (your house, car, time etc.) to others in your community. See the difference?

mynameisvlad 11y ago
So how is that not a logical extension? They don't have to be identical to be logical extensions.
- wavefunction 11y ago
  For something to be a logical extension, it has to derive from the other. That would mean that the community of Portland would need to benefit from AirBnB rentals as well as the renter and rentee, which seems difficult to prove given the recorded effect of AirBnB in other areas. The same with Uber - for the "sharing economy" to be a logical extension of communitarianism, the greater population of Portland needs to derive some utility from people providing and using Uber service.
  - avn2109 11y ago
    I'm a huge skeptic of Uber's explotative labor practices and general shadiness, and I think "sharing economy" is doublespeak marketing BS. But credit where credit is due, the greater population of Portland might well realize some material benefits from Uber, via reduced drunk driving (or reduced drunk ironic fixed-gear cycling, as the case may be).
- angersock 11y ago
  It's not a logical extension because most of these "sharing economy" companies are a) subverting the rules and sovereignty of the communities in which they operate, b) introducing parasitic drag in the deployment of capital in those places, and c) creating a disconnect between local owners and local consumers--in effect, you do business with Uber, not Francine the cabby. Orthogonal to all that, of course, is the generally scummy practice of reducing these folks to serfdom.
joosters 11y ago
The term 'sharing' is being abused for most 'sharing economy' companies. If you stretch the meaning of sharing to include cash-based transactions, I'm 'sharing' whenever I buy something from a store. It's an abuse of language just to make these companies sound kinder.
- theseatoms 11y ago
  'The renting economy' just doesn't have the same ring.
  - branchless 11y ago
    This is spot on. Companies want to have you rent everything from them. Sharing is owned by the community without middle-men deriving rent. Uber and AirBnB just want to avoid regulation and taxes to undercut incumbents and take a bigger cut for themselves. They have nothing to do with the local community, in fact a global taxi firm degrading workers rights couldn't be further from this.
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      Sharing is owned by the community without middle-men deriving rent. By this definition, virtually nothing is sharing beyond maybe volunteer operated community gardens. Virtually every service involves some sort of middle men getting a cut. Even a volunteer run community garden would if gardening supplies are purchased rather than wrought from supplies indigenous to the land.
      - OverlordXenu 11y ago
        You're being intentionally obtuse and making a flawed analogy. There is a major difference between a community garden where someone has to go to Home Depot to buy supplies and Uber/AirBnb. In the Garden scenario, Home Depot does not act like Uber as they are not the gatekeepers to your community garden, but instead one (of many) sources for supplies. Home Depot is not rent seeking or deriving rent.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
>"Sharing economy" What does this mean, really? What is being "shared" with me? Airbnb's pricing in competitive markets is nearly on par with a hotel room. No one is being generous or sharing here. They're asking for what the market can bear. Except I don't get a concierge, daily housekeeping, a gym, a pool, etc. There's this hypocritical leftist double-speak here where we pretend there's some community building or altruistic aspect at work. There's not. Its just people turning their homes into hotels for massive profit. Hell, now commercial entities are involved, so that means less affordable rental spaces for local residents because they're just Airbnb money makers now. Now rents/prices go up to reflect the lack of real estate for renters and buyers. You'd think community minded people would care about that. Nope, they just want easy money like everyone else, but somehow they get to pretend they're morally above us all while doing it. Portland hipsters are all about the Benjamins too.
- JonnieCache 11y ago
  > hypocritical leftist double-speak It has nothing to do with the left. The left, such as it is, views the "sharing economy" as the newest innovation in neoliberal capitalist divide-and-rule subjugation.
  - TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
    Right. The "sharing economy" is an appropriation of left-wing rhetoric by the right.
  - fwn 11y ago
    The left has spoken.
    - JonnieCache 11y ago
      I calls them as I sees them.
- branchless 11y ago
  Really great to see people actually thinking about big business not being your friend on a US web-site. Now the US has become a finance/rentier economy it's great to see young people questioning business propaganda. I'm not sure however why you say "leftist double-speak" though. Bloomberg, last time I checked, wasn't left-wing. This is all neo-liberal "free market" / "let's financialise everything" crowd.
joelhaus 11y ago
In theory, the traditional model, which might include a hotel chain in the transaction, would funnel a greater percentage of funds away from the local economy. Under the "sharing-economy" model, more of the funds exchanged in the transaction stay local.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  Except, well, this entire "sharing economy" BS has involved large multinational companies (Airbnb, Uber, etc.). So it's exactly the same.
- frostmatthew 11y ago
  > In theory, the traditional model, which might include a hotel chain in the transaction, would funnel a greater percentage of funds away from the local economy Do we actually care about the percentage? If you spend $100 on Airbnb and most of that ends up in the local economy that's a lesser local impact than if you spend $250 at a hotel, even if only half of that stays in the local economy.
  - codyb 11y ago
    But at $100 dollars a night a tremendous amount of people more can afford to stay maybe edging out the hotel if there's enough availability on AirBnB. I'd also say, yes, the percentage is important in general.
    - frostmatthew 11y ago
      > But at $100 dollars a night a tremendous amount of people more can afford to stay That's irrelevant to the comment I was responding to, which was suggesting a transaction with a hotel chain "would funnel a greater percentage of funds away from the local economy" (despite its lack of relevance to the per-transaction discussion you do bring up a valid point which further shows we don't care about the percentage). > I'd also say, yes, the percentage is important in general. Why? If more money spent within an economy is beneficial to the economy then you want to maximize the amount of money spent within that economy. Imagine a hypothetical economy of one person, you. Would you rather have a million dollars taxed at 50% or $100,000 taxed at 5%? Even though the percent you end up with is less you're still going to choose the million because $500,000 is more than $95,000.
s73v3r 11y ago
Nitpick: The "sharing" economy is where the company depends on a bunch of contractors to do the actual work, and just takes some off the top.
- kpennell 11y ago
  http://www.metareader.org/post/the-cult-of-sharing.html http://www.metareader.org/post/the-cult-of-sharing.html pulled from here?
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
kpennell 11y ago
"Much of what counts as sharing turns out to be nothing more than ordinary economic transactions between individuals arranged through digital platforms owned by venture-funded companies that act as middlemen, enabling them to take a percentage off the top." From: http://www.metareader.org/post/the-cult-of-sharing.html http://www.metareader.org/post/the-cult-of-sharing.html (worth the read)
- JoeAltmaier 11y ago
  Disingenuous - its not at all normal to use the family car to give a ride, or rent out your house while you're away. The digital platforms enable everybody to get in the game. Which is a total game-changer.
  - samstave 11y ago
    Both are true actually. People have been renting out their homes via CL for over a decade. These "glue" services for AirBnB etc just make that transaction a lot better, and AirBnB takes their cut -- but people could post listings for vacation rentals online forever. I rented apartments for the weekend in NYC as far back as 2002 off CL.

by glup 11y ago

mynameisvlad 11y ago

So how is that not a logical extension? They don't have to be identical to be logical extensions.

wavefunction 11y ago
For something to be a logical extension, it has to derive from the other. That would mean that the community of Portland would need to benefit from AirBnB rentals as well as the renter and rentee, which seems difficult to prove given the recorded effect of AirBnB in other areas. The same with Uber - for the "sharing economy" to be a logical extension of communitarianism, the greater population of Portland needs to derive some utility from people providing and using Uber service.
- avn2109 11y ago
  I'm a huge skeptic of Uber's explotative labor practices and general shadiness, and I think "sharing economy" is doublespeak marketing BS. But credit where credit is due, the greater population of Portland might well realize some material benefits from Uber, via reduced drunk driving (or reduced drunk ironic fixed-gear cycling, as the case may be).
angersock 11y ago
It's not a logical extension because most of these "sharing economy" companies are a) subverting the rules and sovereignty of the communities in which they operate, b) introducing parasitic drag in the deployment of capital in those places, and c) creating a disconnect between local owners and local consumers--in effect, you do business with Uber, not Francine the cabby. Orthogonal to all that, of course, is the generally scummy practice of reducing these folks to serfdom.

joosters 11y ago

The term 'sharing' is being abused for most 'sharing economy' companies. If you stretch the meaning of sharing to include cash-based transactions, I'm 'sharing' whenever I buy something from a store. It's an abuse of language just to make these companies sound kinder.

theseatoms 11y ago
'The renting economy' just doesn't have the same ring.
- branchless 11y ago
  This is spot on. Companies want to have you rent everything from them. Sharing is owned by the community without middle-men deriving rent. Uber and AirBnB just want to avoid regulation and taxes to undercut incumbents and take a bigger cut for themselves. They have nothing to do with the local community, in fact a global taxi firm degrading workers rights couldn't be further from this.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    Sharing is owned by the community without middle-men deriving rent. By this definition, virtually nothing is sharing beyond maybe volunteer operated community gardens. Virtually every service involves some sort of middle men getting a cut. Even a volunteer run community garden would if gardening supplies are purchased rather than wrought from supplies indigenous to the land.
    - OverlordXenu 11y ago
      You're being intentionally obtuse and making a flawed analogy. There is a major difference between a community garden where someone has to go to Home Depot to buy supplies and Uber/AirBnb. In the Garden scenario, Home Depot does not act like Uber as they are not the gatekeepers to your community garden, but instead one (of many) sources for supplies. Home Depot is not rent seeking or deriving rent.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

>"Sharing economy" What does this mean, really? What is being "shared" with me? Airbnb's pricing in competitive markets is nearly on par with a hotel room. No one is being generous or sharing here. They're asking for what the market can bear. Except I don't get a concierge, daily housekeeping, a gym, a pool, etc. There's this hypocritical leftist double-speak here where we pretend there's some community building or altruistic aspect at work. There's not. Its just people turning their homes into hotels for massive profit. Hell, now commercial entities are involved, so that means less affordable rental spaces for local residents because they're just Airbnb money makers now. Now rents/prices go up to reflect the lack of real estate for renters and buyers. You'd think community minded people would care about that. Nope, they just want easy money like everyone else, but somehow they get to pretend they're morally above us all while doing it. Portland hipsters are all about the Benjamins too.

JonnieCache 11y ago
> hypocritical leftist double-speak It has nothing to do with the left. The left, such as it is, views the "sharing economy" as the newest innovation in neoliberal capitalist divide-and-rule subjugation.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
  Right. The "sharing economy" is an appropriation of left-wing rhetoric by the right.
- fwn 11y ago
  The left has spoken.
  - JonnieCache 11y ago
    I calls them as I sees them.
branchless 11y ago
Really great to see people actually thinking about big business not being your friend on a US web-site. Now the US has become a finance/rentier economy it's great to see young people questioning business propaganda. I'm not sure however why you say "leftist double-speak" though. Bloomberg, last time I checked, wasn't left-wing. This is all neo-liberal "free market" / "let's financialise everything" crowd.

joelhaus 11y ago

In theory, the traditional model, which might include a hotel chain in the transaction, would funnel a greater percentage of funds away from the local economy. Under the "sharing-economy" model, more of the funds exchanged in the transaction stay local.

TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago
Except, well, this entire "sharing economy" BS has involved large multinational companies (Airbnb, Uber, etc.). So it's exactly the same.
frostmatthew 11y ago
> In theory, the traditional model, which might include a hotel chain in the transaction, would funnel a greater percentage of funds away from the local economy Do we actually care about the percentage? If you spend $100 on Airbnb and most of that ends up in the local economy that's a lesser local impact than if you spend $250 at a hotel, even if only half of that stays in the local economy.
- codyb 11y ago
  But at $100 dollars a night a tremendous amount of people more can afford to stay maybe edging out the hotel if there's enough availability on AirBnB. I'd also say, yes, the percentage is important in general.
  - frostmatthew 11y ago
    > But at $100 dollars a night a tremendous amount of people more can afford to stay That's irrelevant to the comment I was responding to, which was suggesting a transaction with a hotel chain "would funnel a greater percentage of funds away from the local economy" (despite its lack of relevance to the per-transaction discussion you do bring up a valid point which further shows we don't care about the percentage). > I'd also say, yes, the percentage is important in general. Why? If more money spent within an economy is beneficial to the economy then you want to maximize the amount of money spent within that economy. Imagine a hypothetical economy of one person, you. Would you rather have a million dollars taxed at 50% or $100,000 taxed at 5%? Even though the percent you end up with is less you're still going to choose the million because $500,000 is more than $95,000.

s73v3r 11y ago

Nitpick: The "sharing" economy is where the company depends on a bunch of contractors to do the actual work, and just takes some off the top.

kpennell 11y ago
http://www.metareader.org/post/the-cult-of-sharing.html http://www.metareader.org/post/the-cult-of-sharing.html pulled from here?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

kpennell 11y ago

"Much of what counts as sharing turns out to be nothing more than ordinary economic transactions between individuals arranged through digital platforms owned by venture-funded companies that act as middlemen, enabling them to take a percentage off the top." From: http://www.metareader.org/post/the-cult-of-sharing.html http://www.metareader.org/post/the-cult-of-sharing.html (worth the read)

JoeAltmaier 11y ago
Disingenuous - its not at all normal to use the family car to give a ride, or rent out your house while you're away. The digital platforms enable everybody to get in the game. Which is a total game-changer.
- samstave 11y ago
  Both are true actually. People have been renting out their homes via CL for over a decade. These "glue" services for AirBnB etc just make that transaction a lot better, and AirBnB takes their cut -- but people could post listings for vacation rentals online forever. I rented apartments for the weekend in NYC as far back as 2002 off CL.