Hacker News Reader

Comment by toomuchtodo | Hacker News Reader

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?

What makes you think you have any kind of right to choose who lives next to you, or to have a say in what they do with their property? If you take Airbnb out of the equation, the assertion is ridiculous.

I have a right to say no to AirBnB. Does my individual opinion matter? Probably not. Does the collective opinion of my neighborhood matter? Yeah it kind of does.

We've been saying no to AirBnB for years, this isn't anything new. NYC says yes but for some reason the rest of the world thinks we're wrong to choose how we want to live.

If your neighbor has a friend stay with them, and their lease allows it, you have no say in the matter. It's their property rights, which flow to them from upstream property/rights owners.

This is no different. Your right end where their rights begin, which I'd say start right around where their property lines/walls are.

And their lease likely says "No subleasing". If rent controlled, it precisely defines the amount that can be earned.

Homeowners associations should be able to decide whether or not they want short-term rentals.

Well, for one thing, I got an apartment in building where I knew sub-leasing was not allowed.

What exactly do you feel your rights to be in this situation?

What do you feel grants you the rights you feel you have in this situation?

Move out. The simplest possible solution.

Your rights does not include the right to constant neighbors. or likable, or any. In the deed you have there is no clause of restricting the mobility of the others. (if there is - this is another thing entirely).

I bet you have an HOA. Use it. This issue should be an HOA thing, not a state/city thing.

How do you define 'efficient'? Is pushing out people who want to live in the city in order to fit more visitors an efficient use of resources? I would argue that it is not.

The free market is deciding what the best use of the space is, in terms of generating revenue and value for all parties involved. That's the power of the sharing economy

That's only because the effects of not having long-term residents who care about a community only manifest themselves monetarily years down the line.

only if you treat revenue and value as interchangeable. the value of someone having a stable place they can rent and not fear the landlord will kick them out to run a revolving-door hotel he can squeeze the maximum amount of rent out of is immense, whether or not they can afford to pay as much as the collective influx of transients would.

But the argument Airbnb makes is not in favor allowing building landlords to evict tenants and run illegal hotels, nor is it mine. The law should be changed to cover only that case. Not be broadly extended to cover the 87% who rent out their own home[1], to make extra personal money on the side.

[1] according to Airbnb, in the article

Edited for formatting

i believe there is also a large difference, in terms of value, between renting out your flat when you are not there, and renting out a room while you continue to live there, in terms of how much you are invested in keeping the common space pleasant for everyone.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com