It just... doesn't make sense. On some level I think people want to think this way because it avoids blaming ourselves for failing to elect representatives and pass legislature that would've prevented these problems. Or even do that now. That's hard, though! It'd be so much easier if companies just "Did the right thing™".
Of course, they won't, they never have, and we should never expect they will. Organizations will almost always seek to do whatever is best for them, everyone else be damned, and we as a society need to plan for that. Turns out it's just not so easy.
It's too easy to point the finger at some specific entity rather than our structural issues. Pet peeve of mine.
The solution is to construct a system where selfishness is harnessed for the betterment of society. People will work 10x harder for themselves than for others. Fortunately, we know what such a system is - free markets. Free markets in America produced the highest living standard in the world.
A bit dubious. If I were asked which place in the world I thought had the highest standard of living, it sure as fuck wouldn't be the states.
As someone who wasted a lot of 2018 and 2019 trying to get uncorrupted Democrats into office the problem is that huge swaths of the population in the US have just given up. They are so overworked, barely able to stay above water and cannot get any simple break. Of the ~10-15% of a district that comes out to vote for a primary they always heavily lean towards a known brand unless that incumbent has royally screwed up or did not truly fight for his seat to begin with.
Examples:
AOC (NY-14): Joe Crowley was given the seat through a loophole and because he was THE top dog in terms of his connections to Wall Street, the Democrats would give him whatever he wanted. It took someone like AOC who better represents the community working extremely hard to unseat him. And he lost because he never really understood how to win an election so she ran circles around him.
Cenk Uygur (CA-25): This very red district was won by Katie Hill in an amazing victory only after an enormous amount of voter outreach. She had to build a massive amount of voter recognition very quickly and it was still a tough race. When the election came around to vote her replacement after her resignation, voters went with a party loyalist who had been on the ballot more than 5 times already and had been seen around the district vs someone who had pledged no lobbyist money and aligned with Bernie Sanders. I watched firsthand how we managed to convert Trump and old school Republicans (the Ronald Reagan library is in this district) to be for the policies of Bernie Sanders. In the end, we just couldn't overcome that threshold to convince enough of that 10-15% of the voters to vote for us over the person who was familiar.
There are other stories but they all follow the same format. Crushing losses because these all these districts with 700k people just have such poor turnout for elections. Even elections like 2020 had ~66% turnout and typically it is is mid 50s. So many people just have checked out.
I agree with the author that there will be a reckoning not only for AirBNB but for the rest of the elite. A vast swath of the country is sinking further and further and something will eventually have to give.
But in the meantime, it is not entirely the populations fault. When you whole life has been being lied to by previous politicians eventually you will think the system is too far gone.
Imagine if there were no articles written about Amazon, or Airbnb, and instead there were only article written about exploitation of workers or skirting the hotel laws as bad things that are happening (either in theory or out there in the wild). In that case, the public won't actualize it or internalize it enough to take action with who they vote for, and in turn elected officials won't bother taking action because their constituents don't know/don't care and so it's not important for them either.
But that just doesn't generate the clicks like "Amazon is evil" does.
You can flog governments by highlighting how companies like Amazon exploit people and the rules. You could write the exact same article and then instead of demanding AirBnB change, demand the government to change.
"Airbnb consistently undermines the City's efforts to preserve affordable housing, and regularly attempts to thwart regulations put in place to protect New York City residents... Despite claims to self-regulate and crack down on illegal listings, Airbnb continues to be complacent in the illegal practices of over half of their hosts."
I agree that it's probably pointless to appeal to a company that has no interest in following laws that impact the bottom line, but at some point externalizing the costs of regulation shouldn't be a business model.