Hacker News Reader

Comment by josu | Hacker News Reader

>They knew individuals were renting whole apartments 100% of the time, and did nothing.

While this certainly goes against the spirit of Airbnb and probably against their terms and conditions, if there is demand for this kind of short rentals, why wouldn't they be allowed?

(Not directly replying to your comment, just opening up a related discussion)

EDIT: linkregister's comment addresses the issue https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12800412

View on HN

> if there is demand for this kind of short rentals, why wouldn't they be allowed?

There is demand for a lot of things in a lot of areas, but it isn't allowed because it would be for the benefit of a select few at the cost of the many. Casinos, bars, hotels -- any kind of business, really, aren't allowed everywhere even though there may be demand for those services from people who don't actually have to live in that area.

"Think of my backyard" is slightly less compelling than "think of the children"

Just because "think of the children" is an overused argument, doesn't mean we should stop caring about children entirely to avoid that phrasing. Same goes for the "not in my backyard" complaints.

It also doesn't mean that saying it makes a compelling argument.

Reduced rental stock + disruptive transient population introduced in residential areas. No-one wants to live next to a AirBnB. End of discussion. We've been over this a million times here, you're not opening up the discussion.

> No-one wants to live next to a AirBnB. End of discussion.

Exactly.

AirBnB shows total disrespect.

I am sympathetic to those who want clean, low-cost places to stay when visiting NYC. According to Priceline there are $60 hotels/motels in Union City, NJ 15 mins away by transit from Times Square.

Yeah but then you're in Times fucking Square!

The idea that you should have a right to dictate what your neighbors can and cannot not do in their own homes is not uncontroversial, and a slippery slope.

The idea that the city doesn't have a right to dictate exactly that is nonsensical. Pretending that we have suddenly jumped from an anarchist free-for-all city environment with no such concept as zoning to this brand new day of regulations on what a building can be used for is really making it harder to have a sensible conversation about the topic.

These are not self-standing houses. They are apartments that are part of an apartment building which has a doorman or a locked door to keep transients out.

Incidentally, some buildings don't permit pets, for example.

Why is it so hard to understand that we don't want transients in our buildings?

It's called zoning, and people have accepted it.

If you want to get rid of zoning, you can mount a political campaign to do so. Or you can move to Houston.

However, until that happens, you don't get to opt out.

Yeah? Ok, well I'm going to open up a bar next to your home in the suburbs. See the problem?

Can I have a trash landfill on my property?

There're externalities with Airbnb that neighbors end up paying for.

I do not know where you got the 15 min idea from, but this is just not correct. It's about 35 on a weekday and closer to 1 hour during weekends when public transit is slow.

There are no deals in NYC. You always get what you pay for.

Apple maps using bus 159 from Union City NJ to the Port Authority Bus Terminal which is at 8th Avenue and 42nd St. Times Square is At 7th Avenue and 42nd St. is 16 minutes. I don't know where you get 35 minutes.

Apple Maps states the driving distance is 4 miles.

I don't understand why business 159 would take longer on weekends to travel 4 miles.

A monthly subway and bus pass is about $4 per day. I'd consider that a great deal. Getting around as quickly in other cities would cost far more than $4 per day.

Also there are fruit and vegetable stands all over the city with very good deals such as $1 fir 4 bananas.

In Chinatown there are great deals on fish as well as fruits and vegetables.

B&H Photo is a huge electronics, computer and photo store with great deals.

Also there are many museums people can go to for free on certain days.

Truthfully there are many deals in NYC.

Price is as combination of supply and demand. In NYC, the demand is high. If something is cheap, then there is something wrong with it. People often think they are smart buying something cheap here, but the price is alwats fair (be careful with that Chinatown fish).

There are no hotels in Union C ity from where you ambiguously picked your travel route. Where is your 60 dollar motel located?

they are in many places just not nyc. if you are against that, and i agree your point has merits, try to change the law. don't actively work to break the law.

To be fair, they're 'just' following the Uber playbook of breaking the law in the most public way possible with the hope of changing the law in their favour

No, not really, because AirBnB puts transients in apartment buildings that threaten the safety of people who live there. AirBnB seems to have little regard for the safety of New Yorkers: there are children, the elderly, and women who should be able to feel safe and be safe in their own apartment buildings. Many, many buildings have doormen in NYC have doormen who keep transients out.

People are free to take Uber and it does not threaten the safety of New Yorkers. In fact, it has been helpful to help reduce taxi-like vehicle fares in NYC for New Yorkers. AirBnB does not benefit New Yorkers except those who rent out their apartments.

To the extent that AirBnB increases tourism to an area, or reduces the cost of lodging, leaving a propensity for tourists to spend more locally (and have the same total cost of their stay), the local merchant community benefits.

Well, if this is the goal, then the merchants could advertise the low-cost hotels in Union City, NJ ($60 Priceline) 15 mins from Times Square. This way the merchants benefit without the harms to NYC residents. Of course, the businessmen hotel/motel owners in Union City benefit as well. Win-win-win (NYC merchant, NYC resident, Union City merchant).

If I'm a deli, pub, pizza, or dinner place in Manhattan, I benefit WAY less from someone staying in another state than I do from someone staying in my neighborhood.

Union City, NJ is 4 miles from Times Square (Apple Maps). People live there are far beyond and commute to NYC every day for work. While technically another state, it is much closer to Times Square than much, if not most, of NYC.

Most New Yorkers could care less that people are using AirBnB to save money. We do care about transients being in our apartment buildings.

People who are visitors to any city or country should show respect to those who live there.

4 miles and crossing a river is a pretty long walk for pizza, beer, or dinner. I doubt you'll find a pizza place in Times Square who wants to advertise for people to go stay in New Jersey in hopes that that advertising will be net profitable for them.

It's obvious you don't like AirBnB's prior operations in NYC; I can respect that. I started out commenting how AirBnB can in fact benefit a New Yorker other than those who directly rent out their apartments on the site.

That's the logic used to lobby for allowing cruise ships to dock in your port, but the reality is it's the high-end visitors who spend money. The kind who stay in a nice hotel.

Most everyone who stays in a city away from home buys food and drink.

Some of those people will buy more expensive food and drink if their lodging is cheaper, but almost everyone buys something locally.

So, in other words, you don't understand why we have zoning laws, so you think they should be wiped off of the books.

Because the lasting effects of unchecked tourism are never positive.

Exactly. The market is filling a niche here and it seems the only response is that "it's wrong because the rules say it's wrong".

No, the response is that we don't want transients in our apartment buildings. NYC is a very large, dangerous city. Many, many buildings have doormen who keep transients out and help to protect the safety of children, the elderly, and women.

As for that market niche, I assume you mean affordable hotels. A Priceline search yields $60 per night hotels/motels in Union City, NJ. Union City is about 15 mins by transit from Times Square.

NYC is very large, and on the whole very very safe. It is in fact the safest city in America. The real problem with permanent whole apartment rentals is that is puts a strain on the limited housing supply. Its easier to regulate against non-conventional use than to rewrite zoning to allow more affordable housing to be built. So, that's the regulation we get.

NYC has a homicide rate 3 times per-capita of that of London. There is a lot of violent crime and there is also property crime.

I live in NYC and nobody I know of wants transients in the buildings. One of the functions of doormen is to keep strangers out. AirBnB is like a "back door" to allow these people into the building.

People should instead use affordable hotels $60 per night according to Priceline in Union City, NJ 15 mins by transit from Times Square.

Heaps of people in NYC live in buildings without a doorman without being viciously murdered.

I assume people intent on murder are happy enough to take out someone blocking their path. I've never lived in a doorman building, but I'm pretty sure they don't wear bullet proof vests and carry guns.

The reason most people aren't murdered is because nobody wants to murder them.

1 in 5 women are raped or experience attempted rape according to CDC

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/feb/...

Violent crime happens to random victims.

The comment I was replying to used the expression "viciously murdered".

In NYC buildings without a doorman have locked outer doors were people are buzzed in once they have spoken to the person they want to visit over the intercom.

I've lived in buildings like that in NYC, those buzzers aren't stopping anyone.

The fact that people have to be buzzed in serves as a deterrent.

People hang out in front of the door, usually with some sort of sob story about how all their keys melted or something. Then you have to decide between "do I want to be a dick to someone who is probably my neighbor" or "do I want to let in the murderer". Fortunately I've invented the third option, "looks like it's time to go get some coffee".

Yeah, because NYC has a rate of just over 3 per 100,000 and London's is just over 1.1. Both are insanely low. A rate of 1.1 is pretty typical across Western Europe, but the rate in L.A. is 6.3, 5.3 in SF so its kind of relative. For the US, New York is very safe. If you're really worried about safety, lobby for an end to the drug war, improved mental health services, and policies that decrease income inequality.

8.5 million/100K * 3 is > 250 homicides in NYC every year.

For every death there are many cases of violent crime including rape, property crime. It is a big city.

> If you're really worried about safety, lobby for an end to the drug war, improved mental health services, and policies that decrease income inequality.

Banks should not use vaults to protect their money. Instead they should lobby....

Just as banks want to protect money in their care, we value our lives. In an idea world, banks wouldn't need vaults and we need not lock our front doors. But this is not an ideal world.

Good things:

- Makes visiting the city cheaper

- Increases tourism

- Enriches land-owners

Bad things:

- Skirts consumer protection laws

- Makes it harder for law-abiding hotels to survive in that situation

- Reduces inventory of rental units on the market, driving up local prices in an already expensive place

- People in a "hotel room" are more likely to misbehave than someone that actually intends to live somewhere

It's not wrong just because it's illegal, it's wrong because it causes various problems in the city and for the people that live there.

If it's not wrong for being illegal, I wouldn't argue that law abiding hotels especially deserve to stay in business.

Yeah. It's like the argument "because it's against the law, it's fundamentally bad."

Just take a look at dealership laws. Do you really think those laws are there to protect consumers? Or do they merely protect the incumbents which helped push for the laws?

And now we're forced to buy used cars from sleazy middlemen because they have a legislated monopoly. Good thing those laws are there to protect us!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com