> (except Airbnb themselves).
And the sellers on AirBnB who don't want to deal with the complicated mess that will cause.
And the buyers on AirBnB who don't want to pay the prices that dealing with that mess will cause.
And the sellers on AirBnB who don't want to deal with the complicated mess that will cause.
And the buyers on AirBnB who don't want to pay the prices that dealing with that mess will cause.
If you cannot guarantee clean sheets, working smoke detectors, potable water... then you really should not be offering your house as a place to stay.
Imagine a world where you fly halfway around the country, land, drive to your hotel, and discover body sweat stains on the sheets, the water is undrinkable, oh and sometimes the light switch sparks when you flip it.
The hotel says you will need to pay to "upgrade" those room features.
You complain to the hotel owner - who doesn't care... he has your money already and isn't interested in refunding it. He states you accepted the room's condition when you booked the room.
This is the equivalent of what you are advocating. This is flatly _not_ progress of any kind. It's a gigantic step backwards in safety and living conditions.
None of this even considers the other side of the token - the lodging owner. What happens if the rentee trashes the place and Airbnb refuses to reimburse you? Your home owners insurance won't cover anything if they realize you are renting to others for profit. You have no recourse.
Airbnb has refused to regulate themselves. There is no reasonable guarantee of anything for either side of the transaction. So now, the government is going to step in and do it for them.
No, this is certainly not equivalent. If you accepted shitty terms that's on you for failing to read, plain and simple.
> So now, the government is going to step in and do it for them.
This isn't even the sort of thing they're talking about regulating though - they're talking about doing ridiculous stuff like zoning, booking discrimination, accessibility, etc laws on these, nothing to do with the quality of the rooms at all but which certainly do increase the costs to the sellers.
We have zoning laws for a reason[1][2]. We didn't always...
We already know too many rentals in an area bring down property values (or stagnate them at best).[2] Rentals are rarely cared for with the same degree as an owner-occupied property. Adding transients to the mix is likely to exacerbate this phenomenon.
There are other reasons for zoning laws, as well. We cannot just throw all this out (forgetting the reasons they exist) simply because some company wants to make a profit.
[1] http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Bloody_ZoningLaws.html
[2] http://realestate.findlaw.com/land-use-laws/land-use-and-zon...
[3] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/where-we-live/wp/2015/10...
You seem to disagree with zoning laws. However I'd bet dollars to donuts you'd start to agree when your neighbors sell their house and it's converted into a liquor store, bringing all the normal types that tend to hang around such places.
Airbnb is not a liquor store - but it's not a owner-occupied property either. It's a person trying to run a commercial property in a residentially zoned area. Your neighbors have the right to not have to put up with commercial buildings and all the things that come along with it.