111–120 of 276 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
God forbid we more efficiently allocate resources in a dynamic way. If done safely and ethically, its a fabulous with for consumers.
At the end of the day, it's a hotel. I don't want to live next to someone from somewhere else who isn't here to be my neighbor. What about my rights?
I can't say that I'm at all surprised. Moreover, I would expect to see more judges, as well as legislatures, pass such rules. I've discovered (full-disclosure: through consulting work with a site similar to AirBNB) that many vested interests -- typically hotels and real-estate organizations -- don't want such sites to operate. Until and unless the legislators are convinced to change the rules by a popular, grass-root…
I do agree with you on the constantly new people problem. I recently found out that the reason the front door to my building is broken is because one of our neighbors is a prostitute and the johns were letting themselves in and buzzing random doors to get the second door unlocked. Since we aren't a hotel the burden of safety and security has been placed on her neighbors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I'd have to dig up the article but I've read about shady landlords evicting residents and turning entire apartment buildings into Airbnb hotels. Why shouldn't landlords have the right to turn their buildings into Airbnbn hotels? (Assuming that the landlord pays taxes as usual, and the evicted residents were evicted under the rental agreement).
The fire codes and taxes for a hotel are much more onerous than for a residential apartment building. Presumably landlords who are doing illegal conversions are flouting both, plus also violating zoning rules by converting a residential building into something else. (I believe NY zoning has specific "hotel districts".)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn't mean those laws shouldn't be challenged. Often they were put in place under different circumstances.
Could you please clarify which of those circumstances do not apply today? Especially the basic one that most housing space is intended for residency which, by its nature, is less lucrative then short-term renting? Quite on the contrary, in this case I think that the circumstances here are even pointing towards more regulation and AirBNB is accellerating that.
Conversely, per Airbnb's quote, 87% of the rooms listed on the site are people's own homes of which they rent out a portion, or the whole thing for a limited time they rent out. So these are not people trying to circumvent the tax law (and by all means tax their Airbnb income as a hotel would be), they are just trying to make additional income to live in one of the most expensive cities in the world. Those 87% were not the target of the law, because this model did not exist at the time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is actually an annoying thing about NYC. In NYC, when people say "New York," they actually mean "New York City's five boroughs." When people say "upstate" or "upstate New York," they mean the rest of the state of New York minus NYC. When people say "the city," they mean "Manhattan." The title only makes sense to residents of NYC.
Actually, I am a resident of Rochester and I understood the title intuitively. Rochester is far (6 hours+) from The City. I was from Buffalo before that, even farther away. I am used to hearing about odd laws that only apply in NYC (the boroughs), from special conditions on a learners' permit license, to bans on 16+oz fountain drinks, when I hear "now illegal in New York" I tend to think naturally, it must apply only…
If I had to guess (I used to be in politics), your dad spends a lot of time complaining about property taxes -- I can guarantee those don't leave your municipality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would a landlord (at least in a low-vacancy area like NY or SF) ever accept such an amendment to the lease?
They could do it in exchange for charging an even higher rent?
I was really trying to think of ways it affects me as a landlord and property owner. I really don't care what people do in the property as long as it's legal and causes no damage, but I want to be protected and considered as well.
Right now we are just completely cut out of the entire process, and there's little incentive for us to NOT take a hostile stance.
I can't say that I'm at all surprised. Moreover, I would expect to see more judges, as well as legislatures, pass such rules. I've discovered (full-disclosure: through consulting work with a site similar to AirBNB) that many vested interests -- typically hotels and real-estate organizations -- don't want such sites to operate. Until and unless the legislators are convinced to change the rules by a popular, grass-root…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please do explain. I think the sharing economy is brilliant and the way of the future. If there's spare capacity in the world, why should it not be utilized. Unsafe? Is it more unsafe to a degree that the ends don't justify the means? I doubt it.
Perhaps sharing tools, yes. Sharing cars, MAYBE. But sharing living spaces and housing, no. Housing is one of the most intimate services out there services out there. I have standards, I have rights, and I want to feel safe and secure where I live. I am a New Yorker and I don't want to feel like I'm living like a poor person with a hotel next door. EDIT: The very definition of a hotel - An establishment providing acc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason there isn't enough housing, in SF especially is government intervention. Zoning laws prevent housing supply meeting demand.
I've heard SF's laws against denser housing are a major factor in the housing "shortage" there. [1] In NYC, rent control laws are a major factor in the artificial housing shortage. There's a consensus across economists of all stripes that rent control is a bad thing ("the most efficient technique presently known to destroy a city -- except for bombing"). See the studies cited here. [2] [1] http://pandodaily.com/2012/…