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

Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

abc.net.au

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 37 posts

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#21

Post by Arainach »

stouset wrote: post #20
Arainach wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apartments are perfectly fine and should be encouraged, as they're dense and serve an important purpose. That's not what's happening with AirBnB. That's turning the limiter supply of ownable property (condos and houses) into short term rentals for the owner's profit at the community's expense. Also, I never said that outright banning is the proper option. Heavy taxation on strictly limited rental options (liter to a…

Yes, we understand that AirBNB is having negative effects on communities. Perhaps something should be done. But banning “investment properties” in a way that de facto bans rental units is not only a nonstarter but also a terrible idea in general.

Why?

I'm not saying rich people can't have their second place on the lake or that companies aren't free to build apartment complexes. What benefit to society does allowing businesses and landlords to own portfolios of single family homes and rent them out offer?

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#22

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

Arainach wrote: post #21
stouset wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we understand that AirBNB is having negative effects on communities. Perhaps something should be done. But banning “investment properties” in a way that de facto bans rental units is not only a nonstarter but also a terrible idea in general.

Why? I'm not saying rich people can't have their second place on the lake or that companies aren't free to build apartment complexes. What benefit to society does allowing businesses and landlords to own portfolios of single family homes and rent them out offer?

Who will rent houses to people who can't afford homes?

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#23

Post by atatatat »

throw_m239339 wrote: post #13

I just want to say, I live in a country where there are laws for and against almost everything, where most Airbnb listings are basically illegal, yet the city I live in is one of the top Airbnb destination. What I mean, is that laws are useless if there is no means to for them to be seriously enforced, which is the case where I live. On the other hand, if I were to create my own Airbnb website in that same country, I…

Why be upset? Instead, make a service breaking laws elsewhere but not your home jurisdiction.

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#24

Post by matt74827289 »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #22
Arainach wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I'm not saying rich people can't have their second place on the lake or that companies aren't free to build apartment complexes. What benefit to society does allowing businesses and landlords to own portfolios of single family homes and rent them out offer?

Who will rent houses to people who can't afford homes?

People can't afford homes because investors are buying them all at high price to turn around and rent them out.

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#25

Post by stouset »

matt74827289 wrote: post #24
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who will rent houses to people who can't afford homes?

People can't afford homes because investors are buying them all at high price to turn around and rent them out.

Some people can't afford homes because investors are buying them. There is zero reason to believe that prohibiting investment properties would allow everyone to afford a home.

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#26

Post by anamax »

Arainach wrote: post #19
anamax wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate that you're honest about wanting to ban renting residences. That said, I see renting as a good option for many people. For example, I didn't have the money to buy after college so I rented. Even if I could have bought, I probably wouldn't have because I was reasonably sure that I wanted to move in a year or two. If there weren't rentals, what should I have done?

Apartments are perfectly fine and should be encouraged, as they're dense and serve an important purpose. That's not what's happening with AirBnB. That's turning the limiter supply of ownable property (condos and houses) into short term rentals for the owner's profit at the community's expense. Also, I never said that outright banning is the proper option. Heavy taxation on strictly limited rental options (liter to a…

As I pointed out, your "residences can't be investment properties" rule bans apartment houses.

If you intended to talk only about very short-term rentals, you should have made that clear a couple of messages ago.

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#27

Post by anamax »

matt74827289 wrote: post #24
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who will rent houses to people who can't afford homes?

People can't afford homes because investors are buying them all at high price to turn around and rent them out.

And they either rent them at a high price or they lose money.

Like I wrote above, a friend of mine owns two houses. Under the proposed "no investment residences" rule, he can't, unless he leaves one of them vacant almost all of the year.

For some people, renting is the right thing. It's unclear how banning rental properties makes their life better.

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#28

Post by anamax »

disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #22
Arainach wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I'm not saying rich people can't have their second place on the lake or that companies aren't free to build apartment complexes. What benefit to society does allowing businesses and landlords to own portfolios of single family homes and rent them out offer?

Who will rent houses to people who can't afford homes?

The only legal rentals under the proposed rule is as room mates.

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#29

Post by totony »

anamax wrote: post #18
Arainach wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a rental property if not an investment property? You are renting with the explicit goal of getting more returns (rent/equity/appreciation) than your costs. Owning property for the purpose of renting it has serious negative effects on communities and society. Communities thrive when people live in them and value them, not when random people come for a few days, abuse the commons, and leave for somewhere else.…

I appreciate that you're honest about wanting to ban renting residences. That said, I see renting as a good option for many people. For example, I didn't have the money to buy after college so I rented. Even if I could have bought, I probably wouldn't have because I was reasonably sure that I wanted to move in a year or two. If there weren't rentals, what should I have done?

>For example, I didn't have the money to buy after college so I rented.

I think that's the main issue. One of the reasons housing is so expensive is because it's an avenue for investment/infinite growth. Maybe if you didn't have to outbid people that think houses are invesment you could have bought a house/afforded a mortage.

Land scarcity/livable land is the thing that makes housing expensive. Allowing people to use that to make profit is unethical.

Re: Banning Airbnb considered as housing crisis bites in coastal towns

#30

Post by totony »

anamax wrote: post #27
matt74827289 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People can't afford homes because investors are buying them all at high price to turn around and rent them out.

And they either rent them at a high price or they lose money. Like I wrote above, a friend of mine owns two houses. Under the proposed "no investment residences" rule, he can't, unless he leaves one of them vacant almost all of the year. For some people, renting is the right thing. It's unclear how banning rental properties makes their life better.

Does your friend need a second property? If there was such a ban someone else could buy it that would have stayed in it/rented it anyway
Post reply on HN