Their inaction and continued ignorance of these issues does magnitudes more harm than their progressive efforts in their corp HQ which benefits very few people in comparison.
Their inaction and continued ignorance of these issues does magnitudes more harm than their progressive efforts in their corp HQ which benefits very few people in comparison.
Same goes for AirBnB. They act as if they're providing some sort of amazing benefit to society when in reality, the negatives are felt by far more people than those who take advantage of their service. It doesn't withstand much scrutiny.
How about Uber? Despite what Uber might lead you to believe, it wasn't really necessary in NYC if you were smart enough to know to call a car service if there were no taxis in your area. Now that Uber has come along, all of the old car service drivers are forced to use Uber and taxi drivers are feeling such intense pressure that they are suicidal. Honestly I didn't mind waiting an extra 5-10 minutes for a cab. Now I can't find taxis in my neighborhood because Uber has taken over. So we have the same people doing the same job but are being paid less because Uber's cut is higher. And the benefit to me is that I don't have to talk to a person and might get home 5 minutes sooner? So for me, it's basically a wash, for the cab drivers it's a negative.
What's really sickening is that we've let them get away with it this long. We were so enamored with all of these new technologies we never stopped to consider if all the 'disruption' was actually going to be a net positive instead of a reorganization of existing power structures.
AirBnB lets you find available short-term housing on their platform, that's all it does. Any complexity that arises around that, as far as I'm concerned, has nothing to do with AirBnB, and everything to do with local governance (if you have a problem with it).
Housing markets are based off of supply and demand, like most things. If AirBnB suddenly alters the nature of what is supplied, why does that matter? The demand in a given location is based off of so many factors to begin with, should we become upset with everything that changes the nature of the housing market? What happens if there is a neighborhood that is completely crime-ridden, and new police station is added right outside. Suddenly the crime goes down, and the housing prices in that neighborhood increase substantially as it becomes safer to live in. Whose fault is it that the people who were living there when it was highly unsafe can no longer afford to pay rent? Is it the police station's fault? Is it the new tenants'? The landlords'?
I just can't understand why people are so averse to letting situations play themselves out. SV, for example, is refusing to allow new construction due to zoning laws, and all of the jobs that drew people here are no longer enough to counterbalance the monumental cost in living...so people are leaving. Natural equilibriums exist. What happens when an area becomes so oversaturated with tourists that it no longer retains what made it desirable? Japanese tourism in Paris has dropped 42% in the last few years. What happens when the lack of supply for regular housing makes it so difficult to find local housing, people working normal service jobs have to travel increasingly far to work in the area? The rates to do those jobs begin to increase, as they become less desirable, and the area becomes less desirable to visit as everything gets more expensive. Those people become more capable of moving back to the area as their rates have gone up, etc.
This need for platforms to take responsibility for everything that happens as a result of the transactions they allow individuals to make with each other is so unbelievably misguided. There isn't always a boogeyman.
As far as I know AirBnB is allowing people in NYC to rent apartments for less than 30 days. Not only are they allowing this to happen they are the ones completing the transaction and profiting from it. This is against NYC law and has been around since AirBnB was founded. To make matter worse when residents are fined for breaking the law they are the ones paying the fine without AirBnB losing money. We all know AirBnb could follow local laws everywhere and not allow any of the activity to happen on their platform. If they can change local governance then good for them but they are clearly involved.
If you are getting evicted by your landlord so he can turn your apartment into an illgal hotel, you do not have the luxury to let things play out. You have to find new housing immediately or become homeless.
Most people, especially those who are poor, live life on a more day to day basis. Your home is connected to your community: the friends who support you, the extended family who provide free child care, or the elderly and infirm members of your community whom you check up on. Being driven out of your home through no fault of your own, so that your landlord can run what amounts to an illegal hotel no less, is a crisis, not something to play wait and see on.
It's true that we will reach equilibrium in the long term, but to quote John Maynard Keynes, "In the long run we are all dead."