My rent was expensive for years before AirBnB came on the scene. AirBnB might put some slight upward pressure on rents in markets with a lot of tourism, but it pales in comparison to the simple fact that supply does not meet demand. Thank the zoning regs and lack of transit investment in less-urban parts of your metro area.
It's shortsighted to point to one item as being "the reason", but it's equally shortsighted to ignore major American cities (Let's be real - This is HN, we're talking about SF) shortsighted development policies as major contributing factors.
Moreover, restricting voluntary economic interactions behind a wall of regulatory licensing schemes, like hotel licenses and taxi licenses, exacerbates income inequality:
https://www.brookings.edu/research/make-elites-compete-why-t...
In short, there's no commonly advocated policy more harmful to society than what you're advocating.
When the choices you make with respect to the use of your property cause harm to other people or their property, they have the right to stop you and to recover damages for harm you've caused. When your voluntary transaction has involuntary (for other people) effects on others' property, they have the right to stop your transaction.
Offering something on the market, that other consenting adults voluntarily choose to buy, does not violate anyone's rights. Competitors do not have a right to dictate how consumers spend their money, so being out competed is not a violation of their rights.
What you're advocating is a blatant violation of their rights based on a belief that people are entitled to other people's private property.
At least learn the basis of free market ideology before criticizing it.
There can be certification.. A certifying body certifies that a taxi driver meets all of the conditions you mentioned and issues certificates to those drivers who do. There can be more than one certification standard, and consumers would be free to choose which certifying standard they trust, or even choose to use a driver with no certifications.
I'm not sure why such a world is so scary for you.
>But you're also the same kind of free market numbskull who supports unfettered capitalism and campaign donations, which is how a special interest strangles a government body like a taxi cab commission.
That's not a very nice or constructive comment. Where I live, Uber is banned, and taxi service is heavily regulated. The taxi drivers are the most dangerous drivers on the roads. Please give me free market competition that results in the high quality service you see from Uber.
You're calling my ideas "corrosive and dangerous" and claiming I have a "false ideology" and yet you don't understand the essence of my point or the arguments I'm raising (e.g. you fail to grasp the distinction between a voluntary certification and a mandate license, which is at the heart of my argument).
Airbnb was valued at $31bn after its last round. As of market close today, that's about more than the market caps of Hilton & Intercontinental combined.
Despite what the astroturfing campaigns of Airbnb et al would have you believe, regulations are meant to, in part, protect competition. If we're unsatisfied with them, we ought to use elections to change them. But allowing private firms to engage in Uber's brand of regulatory arbitrage severely undermines gov't institutions.
The Airbnb industry stands to replace a large chunk of the entire hospitality industry, which is worth substantially more than $31 billion.
The astroturfing is by the powerful hotel lobby, as is almost always the case when you see a push to restrict voluntary economic interactions with licensing requirements that ordinary people can't afford (e.g. hotel licenses which almost all the Airbnb hosts would be unable to afford):
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/16/technology/inside-the-hot...
Let's get rid of doctor licensing then? The free market will separate the good ones from the ones who will kill you! Pyramid schemes? You have the right to invest in one, so why outlaw it? Toxic waste dump? Go for it! Don't let the evil law stop you! Seriously, you're incredibly dull if you cannot grasp the consequences of your words. Each and every one of these hated laws came about as a result of something bad happening, and people were like "yeah, let's prevent that from happening again." Then everything is good, and idiots like you come by and scream about the big gubmint keepin you down! The horrors! Well go back in time then you moron, to the time when slavery existed (there's a law against that) or kids worked in coal mines (there's a law against that) without safety equipment (nor laws) or taxi drivers didn't carry insurance (dreaded regulations that Uner flaunted).
Unlicensed doctors should be legal. As should pyramid schemes. Dumping toxic waste on other people's private property or on commonly held public property is not a "voluntary interaction", and thus should be illegal. A free society is one where people are free to engage in voluntary interactions, and are safe from others violating their right to their person and property.
You tell me to "grow up" and lecture about how "your rights end where others begin". I recommend you take your own advice and learn what it is that I'm actually advocating (hint: a free market doesn't mean no laws/government, and people being allowed to dump toxic waste), and stop advocating for laws that restrict my rights to spend my money how I want.