Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Airbnb's impact on cities

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 153 posts

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#71

Post by johnsea »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #53

Tourists are human beings, same as residents. Tourists value the opportunity to visit for 2 weeks more than residents value the opportunity to live there for 2 weeks (as evidenced by their willingness to pay more). Why do you believe tourists deserve fewer rights than residents? I realize that in terms of blatant power struggles to control the means of violence, tourists will lose. But lets not pretend that's anythin…

No good to

- let tourists fly around in much too cheap airplanes (which destroy environment) and

- let them live in much too cheap appartments (which destroy local communities)

The weak imho are the nature and residents and not the tourists which arbitrarily come and go as they please.

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#72

Post by yummyfajitas »

janpieterz wrote: post #66
yummyfajitas wrote: post #53

Tourists are human beings, same as residents. Tourists value the opportunity to visit for 2 weeks more than residents value the opportunity to live there for 2 weeks (as evidenced by their willingness to pay more). Why do you believe tourists deserve fewer rights than residents? I realize that in terms of blatant power struggles to control the means of violence, tourists will lose. But lets not pretend that's anythin…

Generally the tourist taxes paid (if any) are considerably lower than the taxes a resident pays. Besides payments for city taxes which equal more or less what tourist taxes are (in NL), I also pay taxes (income, possessions/investments, housing) to the countries government, which distributes money to cities. If we'd all be tourists, the world would quickly look different, mostly negatively for the current tourists (t…

The city services consumed by tourists are considerably lower than those consumed by a resident. Why do you believe tourists don't pay for the services they use?

Without having to resort to violence...being able to vote.

You try to disclaim violence and then immediately come back to the fact that residents control the monopoly on violence. Self refuting.

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#73

Post by yummyfajitas »

johnsea wrote: post #71
yummyfajitas wrote: post #53

Tourists are human beings, same as residents. Tourists value the opportunity to visit for 2 weeks more than residents value the opportunity to live there for 2 weeks (as evidenced by their willingness to pay more). Why do you believe tourists deserve fewer rights than residents? I realize that in terms of blatant power struggles to control the means of violence, tourists will lose. But lets not pretend that's anythin…

No good to - let tourists fly around in much too cheap airplanes (which destroy environment) and - let them live in much too cheap appartments (which destroy local communities) The weak imho are the nature and residents and not the tourists which arbitrarily come and go as they please.

The strong are the people with the ability to threaten violence toward others (in this case people attempting to peacefully interact with other residents). Residents can do this with the power of their votes. Tourists can't.

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#74

Post by rorykoehler »

zuzun wrote: post #59
rorykoehler wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apart from their citizens making a living through the platform. From my experience in Berlin they are acting in the best interests of the hotel lobby. The citizens were just a convenient foil.

The people it impacts negatively outnumber the people that benefit from it, it's as simple as that.

That is highly debatable. Berlin needs 40,000 new units a year, Airbnb accounted for 12,000 units. Airbnb is a convenient scapegoat.

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#75

Post by personlurking »

icebraining wrote: post #57
personlurking wrote: post #25

It's not only Airbnb in Europe, but also Erasmus (twice a year they make finding housing very difficult), Uniplaces (like Airbnb but for EU students), local classifieds sites (which now just double as Airbnb and Uniplaces listings) and being known as an affordable city (like here, in Lisbon, which is being called "the new Berlin" as well as the new "startup capital city"). Over the past 3 years, rental prices here ha…

As someone who rents out rooms in Lisbon (not on AirBnB), I can assure you the minimum is not 300/month, nor are those rare. A five minute search finds multiple available rooms for I do agree there is cause for concern, but the knee-jerk attacks on AirBnB is silly. For example, there's not a single word in that article regarding the concerns of landlords in making long term rentals. When it takes two years , hundreds…

Among lots of "young" people I know (in their 20s and 30s), mostly foreigners living here, the consensus is definitely that 300 is the new norm. I've heard it time and time again from different kinds of people living in different neighborhoods in Lisbon. I, myself, am paying 300 (even though I would consider it a 250 euro room), and the landlord wishes to up the rent another 25 euro or so (he tried to get me to rent a smaller room so he could increase the price on mine).

Among Portuguese young people, I've also heard many complaints about how hard it is to find a place that isn't a) way too much for what is being offered compared to previous years and b) in the outskirts of town.

That being said, I am aware there are rooms for less than 300, but I'm more talking about rooms that aren't "shoeboxes", size-wise.

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#76

Post by personlurking »

golergka wrote: post #40
personlurking wrote: post #25

It's not only Airbnb in Europe, but also Erasmus (twice a year they make finding housing very difficult), Uniplaces (like Airbnb but for EU students), local classifieds sites (which now just double as Airbnb and Uniplaces listings) and being known as an affordable city (like here, in Lisbon, which is being called "the new Berlin" as well as the new "startup capital city"). Over the past 3 years, rental prices here ha…

Why do you see this as something bad? Some people are willing to pay more than others for housing, so others have to move elsewhere; this is normal market at work, why would anyone want to stop it?

Because those willing to pay absurd prices are not locals, nor are they living here long-term, thus this causes locals and long-term residents to be pushed out of the city. Imagine being pushed out of your own city just because the market says tourists are more important than residents.

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#77

Post by janpieterz »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #72
janpieterz wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally the tourist taxes paid (if any) are considerably lower than the taxes a resident pays. Besides payments for city taxes which equal more or less what tourist taxes are (in NL), I also pay taxes (income, possessions/investments, housing) to the countries government, which distributes money to cities. If we'd all be tourists, the world would quickly look different, mostly negatively for the current tourists (t…

The city services consumed by tourists are considerably lower than those consumed by a resident. Why do you believe tourists don't pay for the services they use? Without having to resort to violence...being able to vote. You try to disclaim violence and then immediately come back to the fact that residents control the monopoly on violence. Self refuting.

Not so sure city services are considerably lower for a tourist than a resident. If I look to my residential usage or tourist usage, I'd venture I'm about equal, taking into account things like safety, infrastructure, city governmental services etc, if divided up by time. I'm not sure what kind of city services I'm missing that I'm suddenly not using as a tourist but am as a resident? The couple small ones are easily equaled or even outnumbered (ratio-wise) by tourist offices and other services only there for tourists.

Voting and the monopoly of violence has never occurred to me that concretely, it's an interesting viewpoint. Of course the same perspective occurs directly when I become a tourist in the 'tourists' city. The 'Tourist' isn't some vague entity or a non-resident anywhere (generally) but also someone who uses their control of the monopoly on violence.

Turning it around, how do you propose 'tourists' get equal rights?

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#78

Post by bogomipz »

"Earlier this month, it released data showing that since it began it has collected $85m in tax revenue for cities worldwide."

That's not a very impressive figure. That's for a global company with massive revenue, now in it's eight year?

“If it becomes law, this legislation would threaten thousands of low- and middle-income New Yorkers with fines of up to $7,500 simply for listing that they would like to share their homes,” Airbnb fumed.

Uhm no, lower class New Yorkers don't own they rent and this is the point - the property is not theirs to profit from. Most middle class New Yorkers don't own their own homes either and if they do its likely a one bedroom or a studio. A two bedroom in New York is well out of reach of whatever is left of the middle class there. People that can afford two bedrooms in New York are generally not the "lets make a few extra dollars from this sharing economy" types.

I know that in New Orleans the hotel industry has felt the pinch of Airbnb. Even during big weekend like Jazz Fest, you could still get a room last minute this year, something that used to be unheard of. While its great that tourist dollars still enter the local economy, the hotels employ a lot of people. This is significant in an economy that is almost solely based around hospitality and tourism.

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#79

Post by yummyfajitas »

janpieterz wrote: post #77
yummyfajitas wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The city services consumed by tourists are considerably lower than those consumed by a resident. Why do you believe tourists don't pay for the services they use? Without having to resort to violence...being able to vote. You try to disclaim violence and then immediately come back to the fact that residents control the monopoly on violence. Self refuting.

Not so sure city services are considerably lower for a tourist than a resident. If I look to my residential usage or tourist usage, I'd venture I'm about equal, taking into account things like safety, infrastructure, city governmental services etc, if divided up by time. I'm not sure what kind of city services I'm missing that I'm suddenly not using as a tourist but am as a resident? The couple small ones are easily…

I'm not sure what kind of city services I'm missing that I'm suddenly not using as a tourist but am as a resident?

Schools, welfare and similar social programs, free parking. Pretty sure those cost more than tourist offices.

If you are a single worker without a car, none of that applies to you. If you are a single mother who refuses to work it's a huge benefit.

Turning it around, how do you propose 'tourists' get equal rights?

Government that doesn't engage in economic protectionism.

Re: Airbnb's impact on cities

#80

Post by sammoth »

khattam wrote: post #33

So the argument is that since Airbnb makes travel cheaper, it is ruining the cities? Suggesting that hotels were keeping the prices artificially high to limit tourists and hence conserve the cities? Try harder next time.

No it's not that hotel prices are artificially high, they are priced in a completely separate market to residential properties. If there is no regulation on Airbnb rentals, tourists are now competing more in the residential market. This can obviously have an effect on cities.
Post reply on HN