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

151–160 of 171 posts

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#151

Post by ap3 »

ProAm wrote: post #37
mc32 wrote: post #17

When does Campoes term out anyway? There certainly is a struggle between ownership rights and the right of cities to regulate business within their jurisdiction. As a renter, I can sympathize with wanting to avail more rental properties to renters, but I am also very uneasy with politicians dictating what you can and cannot do with your property when that act in and of itself is not otherwise illegal. It's not confis…

> but I am also very uneasy with politicians dictating what you can and cannot do with your property when that act in and of itself is not otherwise illegal The list of things you cannot do is already extremely lengthy and much to the chagrin of homeowners. I assume you've only rented and never owned, but wait until you see what your property taxes go to, what you are allowed to build, not build, must maintain, must…

>Denver is currently trying to raise property taxes to subsidize builders and ease purchase pain of new homeowners who currently cannot afford to buy for example

Sadly there is nothing new in politicians coming to take away more of your money & rights

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#152

Post by ap3 »

jonpaine wrote: post #62
jedberg wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People who buy housing just to rent out on AirBnB would find it more economical to rent out to a long term renter (because the licensing is actually less onerous), thereby increasing the rental supply and lowering rents.

Am I misunderstanding you? SF's legendary rent control creates a clear incentive for landlords to use a service like Airbnb to continually rent at market rate (though lower occupancy rate) while maintaining control to allocate the unit as they see fit. Renting a unit in sf both freezes rental revenue and removes the owners control to reallocate the unit. Did you mean something else?

Why don't more people rail against rent control like they do airbnb?

How many people live in rent controlled units in SF?

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#153

Post by dragonwriter »

ap3 wrote: post #152
jonpaine wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I misunderstanding you? SF's legendary rent control creates a clear incentive for landlords to use a service like Airbnb to continually rent at market rate (though lower occupancy rate) while maintaining control to allocate the unit as they see fit. Renting a unit in sf both freezes rental revenue and removes the owners control to reallocate the unit. Did you mean something else?

Why don't more people rail against rent control like they do airbnb? How many people live in rent controlled units in SF?

> Why don't more people rail against rent control like they do airbnb?

I've seen more people -- on HN and in real life -- railing against rent control than against AirBnB.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#154

Post by kafkaesq »

kelnos wrote: post #16

So basically SF wants companies like Airbnb to do their police/enforcement work for them. The city should be going after the unregistered renters themselves. Sure, that's potentially harder, but I can see that it'd be a burden to order a company to do it for them.

So basically SF wants companies like Airbnb to do their police/enforcement work for them.

Because it's the most cost-effective way of doing things, and -- in this ethically-challeneged startup culture of ours -- it gets the message across.

It's also no different from how regulations are applied to most all other industries in that regard. Liquor stores are required to card anyone who looks like they might possibly be under 21 (and are fined for not doing so). You can argue that the city "should be going after the underage drinkers themselves" -- but decades of empirical evidence suggest this would lead to the laws being widely unenforced.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#155

Post by kafkaesq »

randycupertino wrote: post #44
Spooky23 wrote: post #11

Airbnb is an unlimited well of bad PR. They need to start whacking people with a clue-stick.

They'd probably do well to just fire their PR person. This is one of the most unprofessional responses I've ever heard from a company to a reporter: > We emailed Airbnb spokesman Christopher Nulty to ask whether the library ad was "real." He responded by email, "as opposed to a fake one :)" A follow up email, explaining that we were in fact seeking confirmation as to whether the ads are actually from Airbnb received…

They'd probably do well to just fire their PR person.

No, it's not "the PR person" who's at fault.

One way or another, these decisions (and the mentality and ethos that drive them) always trickle down from the top.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#156

Post by matthewowen »

ap3 wrote: post #143
geebee wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, this is the angle that airbnb likes to push, that people are renting out a "spare" bedroom that wouldn't otherwise be used, or are renting out their place while they're on vacation. In other words, there is no displacement, there is just efficiency. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to be working out that way - housing that was used for permanent residence is now getting converted into airbnb rentals. People are n…

Look, no one has a right to live in a particular city. You can buy or you can rent, and if you can pay then you can stay. To your complaint about people factoring in future rental income - what about people betting on future price increases like during the housing bubble? Should people not do math? As to your last stat, maybe kids just grow up and then more adults moved in to work in tech - would that explain the pct…

Sure, no-one has a right to a particular city. But cities do get to set zoning laws, and do get to say things like "no, you can't turn houses into quasi-hotels". If you don't believe there should be zoning laws or restrictions on use, make the case for that. Otherwise, this is a pragmatic question of how we best shape cities to balance individual liberties against people's reasonable expectations of quality of life.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#157

Post by matthewowen »

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.

I'm sure the condo board is fine: short term renters are probably less demanding in terms of services provided by the condo board. I suspect the buildings fellow residents might differ: they're the ones that suffer quality of life issues from (eg) party rentals.

For reference, co-op boards tend to outright ban short term rentals.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#158

Post by sp332 »

gshulegaard wrote: post #36
sp332 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But your neighbors might not want you to let out your place to an endless parade of strangers. This is a case where the government needs to listen to the people, and determine if the majority want more freedom or a nicer neighborhood.

Who cares what your neighbors want? Seriously. In the Seventeenth Century many American colonists were fleeing England due to religious persecution because their religion didn't happen to be the the dominant/majority held belief [1]. The idea that government should govern based on what the majority want is a fallacy. The specific topic of tyranny of the majority and ways to combat it were discussed in the Federalist…

The idea that government should govern based on what the majority want is a fallacy.

That's why I said "this is a case". Maybe it's a problem for a certain set of people and maybe it isn't. You have to listen to them.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#159

Post by matthewowen »

cstejerean wrote: post #29
sp332 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But your neighbors might not want you to let out your place to an endless parade of strangers. This is a case where the government needs to listen to the people, and determine if the majority want more freedom or a nicer neighborhood.

Then your neighbors should put that in their HOA rules. The city is getting involved to protect hotels not "neighbors".

They don't need to. The city already made laws limiting short term rentals. We voted on them in a citywide referendum. They were passed. This change is merely enforcement of rules that already exist.

Re: Airbnb Is Suing San Francisco to Block Rental Rules

#160

Post by gshulegaard »

sp332 wrote: post #158
gshulegaard wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who cares what your neighbors want? Seriously. In the Seventeenth Century many American colonists were fleeing England due to religious persecution because their religion didn't happen to be the the dominant/majority held belief [1]. The idea that government should govern based on what the majority want is a fallacy. The specific topic of tyranny of the majority and ways to combat it were discussed in the Federalist…

The idea that government should govern based on what the majority want is a fallacy. That's why I said "this is a case". Maybe it's a problem for a certain set of people and maybe it isn't. You have to listen to them.

This is the fallacy I am objecting to.

If the majority of the people want to abolish the First Amendment in order to silence hate speech, the government absolutely should not listen the them.

Tyranny of the majority and mob rule are discussed from various angles in the Federalist Papers and I believe were considered carefully when structuring the American government (in order to prevent them).

Post reply on HN