This is so duplicitous. AirBnB is a for profit company. They have zero skin in the game in terms of exposure to and responsibility for lowered quality of life, apartment hoarding, rental increase, etc.
disclosure: a "New Yorker" since 1989.
[& p.s. the hotel industry, afaik, has a pretty small footprint in terms of side effects on the average resident. Further, it provides a natural cap on the tourist flux in the city, which is a certain plus in my opinion.]
Do you have anything substantial to add to this conversation, green account?
That doesn't change because someone lands on a specific side of the argument and feels they have to make an argument about whether or not the hotel industry is actually powerful. None of that is required in order to understand what the article was saying. And indeed, it actively takes away from it by doing shit like spawning this particular tangent.
Even if it was, does it make Airbnb wrong? Should people not be able to freely make living arrangements with whom they choose for arbitrary amounts of time?