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

Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 171 posts

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#121

Post by abannin »

paulmd wrote: post #114
abannin wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised that this argument gets so much traction without any supporting data. It just plays on fear. First, nothing you listed is an externality but rather direct results of poor behavior. An externality would be something like 'decreases property values of neighboring properties' or 'increased rents due to lower supply'. Second, what data do you have that proves these scenarios are more likely in an AirBnB tha…

Decreased property values near hotels, student ghettos, and other nuisance areas are very commonly depressed, and often have elevated police dispatch rates. It's hardly an uncommon phenomenon. Not all restaurants are roach-infested mold-filled hazards - but we have to treat them all like they potentially are, in the sense that we need to register them and inspect them to prove that they aren't hazards. Marriott and H…

Ah, yes! Decreased property values are an externality! However, judging based on police dispatch or crime rates seems to rely a bit more on correlation than causation. It's pretty easy to argue that hotels are typically built in areas with increased police dispatch rates, not hotels causing the dispatches. Unless you have data that shows that the hotel itself has a higher rate than surrounding areas? Furthermore, there are plenty of examples of short term rentals (typically in the form of hotels or resorts) that are tied to increased property values.

Once again, your arguments support better inspections and code enforcement for health issues not banning short term rentals.

I'm not sure why you assume my history with bedbugs. You are correct that I have never had to deal with a bedbug infestation, but I've helped friends who have. I have lived through multiple other infestation of other insects and rodents because of my neighbors. I've also had neighbors who felt the need to party all night every weekend, and have lived across the street from meth houses and drug dens multiple times. However, all of these experiences were dealing with long term tenants, not short term rentals. I am not discounting the inconvenience of these situations, just questioning why we conclude that they are unique to short term rentals.

It seems that you're confusing the impacts of property values with short term rentals. Long term rentals can occur in very wealthy neighborhoods as well as economically depressed areas. I'm no fan of slum lords, but a slum lord can have long term or short term tenants! Furthermore, they tend to set up shop in economically depressed areas if for no other reason than the overhead is too great in nicer neighborhoods.

Regarding criminal activity, I fail to see how 1) this is isolated to or increased activity from short term vs long term rentals and 2) it assumes that the landlord/host does not care about the activity. While same may not care, it seems quite presumptuous to conclude that all AirBnB hosts will encourage criminal activity. But this presents a really interesting question: why hasn't the city of San Francisco taken steps to train hosts on potential threats if this is a concern?

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#123

Post by abannin »

tjl wrote: post #119
abannin wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wonderful point. Student housing is a great example of long term rentals with tenants that don't always respect the property or neighbors.

They're not exactly long term, though. In my city, they're turned over every 4 months or possibly 8 months. The biggest university has 4 month terms and their co-op programs alternate 4 months on 4 months off.

In SF, 32 days or more is effectively long term.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#124

Post by abannin »

wvenable wrote: post #111
abannin wrote: post #102

Kinda surprised that no one is debating jurisdiction here. Why federal and not state courts? Are federal judges more friendly to this type of case?

Isn't it federal law that they are using to defend against this?

Yes, but there is a tactical decision at play here. AirBnB seems to believe that it has a better chance of winning on privacy and user-generated content issues then state/local laws.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#125

Post by collyw »

mc32 wrote: post #89
holografix wrote: post #76

Can't help but think of the obvious time and time again with the faux-sharing economy. Sharing is a pathetic use of neural linguistics, you're not sharing, your not doing anyone a kindness, you're making money and you're providing a service. Uber and Airbnb will be regulated legislative or through unions. Ask yourself just wtf are cabs so much more inefficient than Uber and hotels more expensive then Airbnb? Few driv…

My recollection might be off, but I think the term was popularized by the tech press not so much the tech companies described as such. However, the argument can be made that the sharing, while not in the classical sense, does reduce the impact on resources through efficiencies. So in that sense, people are sharing resources (as in sharing a bus ride --you both pay) and making less impact on earth's resources. Small c…

I would argue that Airbnb is doing the opposite. Using residential housing for tourists, reducing the supply, when perfectly good hotels are available.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#126

Post by meric »

collyw wrote: post #125
mc32 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My recollection might be off, but I think the term was popularized by the tech press not so much the tech companies described as such. However, the argument can be made that the sharing, while not in the classical sense, does reduce the impact on resources through efficiencies. So in that sense, people are sharing resources (as in sharing a bus ride --you both pay) and making less impact on earth's resources. Small c…

I would argue that Airbnb is doing the opposite. Using residential housing for tourists, reducing the supply, when perfectly good hotels are available.

The hotels's profitability will reduce, and the marginally profitable ones will be converted into apartments, increasing residential supply.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#127

Post by [deleted] »

youngButEager wrote: post #112
notliketherest wrote: post #45

I love to see individuals and companies step up and fight against the psychopaths that run San Francisco.

100% agree. The "control them, tax them, make them lick our boots, what can they do?, they can't do anything about it" mentality is heavy in the SF city leadership. Believe it or not, some people -- lots of people, actually - are 1000% okay with that. Too many in SF, that's for sure. Campos wants: - to be seen as someone who helped the City make more money from the fines and registration requirents - to appease the v…

[deleted]

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#128

Post by CodeWriter23 »

ggreer wrote: post #30
swehner wrote: post #4

First amendment, for sure. I'm guessing this is about this, "The new law would require Airbnb and other short-term rental websites to post registration numbers on listings or email the number and name of the host to the Office of Short-Term Rentals, The City’s agency tasked with enforcing the regulations." (From http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-poised-require-airbnb-list-regi... ) So "their" "free speech rights" are "vio…

It's nothing so silly. As a counterpoint to the Examiner's piece, please read Airbnb's post about the proposed law: https://www.airbnbaction.com/an-update-for-our-community-in-... Basically, the city wants to hold Airbnb responsible for user-generated content. The city also wants Airbnb to hand over users' personal information. Both the EFF and the Center for Democracy & Technology think that these requirements viola…

That's a specious argument and AirBNB is gonna get spanked hard on that one. Also, the CDA Safe Harbor never intended to shield service providers that receive direct monetary benefit from user content itself.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#129

Post by [deleted] »

wvenable wrote: post #110
bobthepanda wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Housing has the issue that someone who is there for a few days at most does not really have any incentive to care about their neighbors or the property they are staying in. Most people would not buy an apartment next to a hotel room.

My co-worker rents a condo on VRBO and the condo board is perfectly fine with the short-term renters as they have far more trouble with long-term renters. The real issue is how much real estate isn't available for long term renters because short term rentals are so much more profitable and easy. It's killer on vacancy rates and drives up rents for everyone.

[deleted]

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#130

Post by ab5tract »

mc32 wrote: post #66
ubernostrum wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

politicians dictating what you can and cannot do with your property OK, let's completely legalize Airbnb-style temporary rentals... but make the host bear the full cost of it . Not the small fraction of the cost the host thinks about, but the actual cost with all the externalities factored in. Because really the only way Airbnb works is if it offloads significant costs onto unconsenting and often unaware third partie…

Do we want to go down the externalities rabbit hole? Do we tax people who cannot knowingly fiscally responsibly afford to have kids more because their kids cause tax externalities that people who don't have kids have to bear (school, food, health subsidies, quality of life impact, etc.)?

We absolutely should tax the shit out of the cretins spawning more 'arrows for god' or parents so broken in the head that they push out 5 kids because they are chasing a specific gender.
Post reply on HN