Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels • Hacker News Board

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#81

Post by zaidf » Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 3:39 AM UTC

blake8086 wrote: post #76

tpeng wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you say that oil companies do not impose environmental externalities, but that the guilt solely falls on drivers who consume gasoline? No, the company bears some responsibility. As to your second question, this is a public policy issue, and there will be a policy response whether AirBNB likes it or not. I think it would be smart for AirBNB to engage in the policy conversation.

Replace "AirBNB" with "a bulletin board" and try to make the same argument.

If there was a bulletin board that was primarily used for activities not permitted by local law, the board would likely be taken down. For example, if there is a bulletin board in a dorm that is used to advertise different drug delivery services in town, either the board will be taken down or a new requirement would be placed requiring all postings to be preapproved.

Craigslist is an Internet bulletin board that chose to remove a few categories due to pressure from law enforcement and the community.

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#82

Post by fennecfoxen » Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 5:04 AM UTC

fennecfoxen wrote: post #15

rch wrote: post #4

> we need to protect the limited housing stock we have from being arbitraged into other uses This seems like a more compelling point than the title topic.

Hmm. Why do we need that? AirBnB promotes better capital utilization. The only reason to be against that is if you're some sort of Commie at heart and think that the government should be in the job of trying to make your rental a way to transfer wealth from landlords to tenants. Which is certainly a political opinion that some people endorse, of course, but when you do that it's generally a contributing factor toward…

Postscript. I see I've been downmodded for identifying Communism as such. I blame the communists. There are a lot in San Francisco. :P

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#83

Post by xerophtye » Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 7:08 AM UTC

zaidf wrote: post #81

blake8086 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replace "AirBNB" with "a bulletin board" and try to make the same argument.

If there was a bulletin board that was primarily used for activities not permitted by local law, the board would likely be taken down. For example, if there is a bulletin board in a dorm that is used to advertise different drug delivery services in town, either the board will be taken down or a new requirement would be placed requiring all postings to be preapproved. Craigslist is an Internet bulletin board that chos…

ok who tried to down vote this guy? he made a really fair point.

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#84

Post by xerophtye » Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 7:37 AM UTC

rch wrote: post #4

> we need to protect the limited housing stock we have from being arbitraged into other uses This seems like a more compelling point than the title topic.

>This seems like a more compelling point than the title topic.

I agree. If a large number of residential spaces start getting occupied for AirBnB usage, that makes the housing stock that much shorter. And that would actually increase price of housing in the city. As another commenter posted, it was harmless when people were letting travelers stay the night in their currently occupied homes, as that didn't decrease the housing stock. But when people start using residential properties as fully functioning motels, that's when we see society adversely affected.

And this is a far more logical argument than the Brothrel one as not everyone agrees how bad that is.

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#85

Post by curiouscats » Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 8:28 AM UTC

teacup50 wrote: post #57

tpeng wrote: post #54

The issue is not between AirBNB and its customers; its customers can evaluate the risks of renting on AirBNB, and factor that into their rental price, as well as insure for adverse outcomes. The real issue is that AirBNB also imposes these risks on communities (i.e., AirBNB's customers' neighbors) by exposing them to, in the worst case, criminal elements, but even in a normal case, temporary renters who lack incentiv…

> This doesn't mean that AirBNB's business can't work, but it does mean that AirBNB needs to work with regulators to find a solution acceptable to the communities in which it operates. I don't see there being a solution at all; hotels are zoned differently than residential for a reason. The fact that AirBNB managed to popularize "breaking zoning laws ON THE WEB" doesn't mean that the zoning laws need to change.

Remember AirBnB is global. Even if we said where it is against the current law it should be stopped there are plenty of places without zoning rules or even say prohibitions due to the rules of the building.

It seems to me there are reasonable community reasons to have constraints and there are reasonable reasons to allow owners and travelers to benefit by coming to terms. It seems to me then there are reasonable reasons to figure out sensible guidelines - even where no rules (or practically none) are in place today. Then laws and regulations (and building rules) can be changed to adapt to these new opportunities and risks.

AirBnB (understandably) wants more latitude than I think they should be given. But I also think it is an opportunity for benefit to society and I don't think just saying there are risks we shouldn't adapt is a great idea.

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#86

Post by bmm6o » Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 4:02 PM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #38

ddt wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think she's taking the position that there's inherent value in providing affordable residential property in New York which exceeds the value in extracting maximum tax revenue from every square inch of the city. At the very least, I find that to be a defensible position.

Yeah, I get that, but it seems pretty tenuous. All this talk about the "value" of the property with regards to it being used for one thing over another, when price is the way in which we quantify value. Who gets to decide what the value of a piece of property to The People should be? Should it be elected officials, who probably only represent the interests of the people on even numbered days, or should it be The Peop…

I forgot to clarify the opposing view. Some people see or foresee a negative outcome of an unfettered market, and want to take steps to prevent it. Then they pass laws or regulations, like hotel zoning. They see the improvement as justification for the burden placed on the market. There are so many of these baked into society that you probably don't notice them. Minimum wage laws, overtime laws, vehicle safety laws, workplace safety laws, noise ordinances, etc.

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#87

Post by greenyoda » Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 10:28 PM UTC

josephschmoe wrote: post #77

tpeng wrote: post #54

The issue is not between AirBNB and its customers; its customers can evaluate the risks of renting on AirBNB, and factor that into their rental price, as well as insure for adverse outcomes. The real issue is that AirBNB also imposes these risks on communities (i.e., AirBNB's customers' neighbors) by exposing them to, in the worst case, criminal elements, but even in a normal case, temporary renters who lack incentiv…

Wouldn't that be the role of insurance? I don't see how bringing the government into this benefits anyone except maybe NIMBYs.

Do you think that the neighbors of an Airbnb renter who were constantly woken up by rowdy visitors would be able to benefit from insurance? The loss of quality of life is an intangible thing that's hard to prove or quantify. The recourse they currently have, of complaining to the landlord and getting the Airbnb renter evicted for violating the terms of their lease, is much more effective.

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#88

Post by greenyoda » Wed, Apr 16, 2014, 10:33 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #25

ddt wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is where the argument for short term whole-residence rentals breaks down. In the beginning, Airbnb was for homeowners and renters to provide a spare bedroom to travelers. In that case, they're facilitating a private transaction between two individuals to exchange money for a place to crash. By the residents staying at the home for the duration of the guest's stay, it's hard to call that a sublet, and the…

> By the residents staying at the home for the duration of the guest's stay, it's hard to call that a sublet Its actually quite easy: you are renting out space in a unit you are renting from a landlord -- so its a sublet. That you are present is irrelevant to whether it is a sublet (it may, OTOH, be relevant to whether it is prohibited by law independent of lease conditions even aside from considering whether it is a…

Right. As soon as the "guests" are paying their "host" money, they're subtenants, not guests.

Re: Krueger Statement on Use of Airbnb for Floating Brothels

#89

Post by dllthomas » Sun, Apr 20, 2014, 5:30 PM UTC

vijayboyapati wrote: post #19

It's always painful to watch luddite bureaucrats pontificate on technology and how it needs to be controlled to "protect" the population. I remember when I was at Google in 2003 there was a California politician who demanded that Google be regulated like a utility company because it was so important. That was when it was still a private company! Or when another California bureaucrat wanted to ban gmail because it vio…

"That was when it was still a private company!"

I don't see why there's any particular link between how widely distributed the ownership of a company is, and whether the infrastructure it is building holds potential for abuse and should be considered a matter of vital public interest. For the record, I think (with low confidence) that this is not true of Google and wasn't at the time, I just think this point is irrelevant.