Not a non-sequitur. The point is that AirBnB landlords are being singled out as though their apartments "belong" in some sense on the market, when nobody cares much about the million other ways real estate is re-purposed away from rentals. AirBnB is an easy target under the current legal framework, but it would be nice if we thought about the broader dynamics before going for the easy target. Hotels are a great example of an alternative: most NY hotels are actually converted apartment buildings. Every new hotel could be an apartment building instead. So... why don't those spaces "belong" in the rental market too?

Ultimately, if market forces make it more profitable for rooms to be used for short-term stays than as homes, it will be very hard to stop that from happening and not at all clear that we should stop it from happening. There are arguments the other way, but it is depressing to hear only the glib assumption that the free market must be stopped. For example, it's not ultra-obvious that policy should favor those who choose to live in Manhattan over those who choose to visit. Among other things, I think it's likely that the average income of the visitors is lower than that of whoever would be renting.