[logicchains]

>ultimately caused damages to many owners whose property values went down as a result of their neighbors running illegal short term rentals

Nobody is entitled to their property remaining a certain value. The same kind of argument is why NIMBYs try to stop the development of new housing, artificially propping up property prices and making it hard for new residents of a city to afford homes.

[AlexandrB]

The whole premise is flawed. AirBnB caused real estate prices to rise[1], not fall. If you're for affordable housing you should be against AirBnB.

[1] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3006832

[adrianN]

Artificially occupied apartments also make it hard for new residents to afford homes.

[ideamotor]

Airbnb absolutely increases home prices. Many cities did decide to allow it, but only after owners broke local zoning intent, visitors became used to Airbnb availability, and cities became used to increased taxes. As with many recent changes, this is all great for everyone except those without assets.

[ng12]

I would think the demand for "artificially occupied apartments" is a direct side effect of NIMBYism as well.

[throwaway_USD]

>Nobody is entitled to their property remaining a certain value.

That is not necessarily true. Sure if property values go down as a natural result of supply/demand there is no remedy at law for that, but people are legally entitled to "quiet enjoyment" of their property, which would include enforcement of laws prohibiting short term vacation rentals interfering with your rights and resulting in damages (loss of property value). And under the law violating one's quiet enjoyment to their property results in compensatory damages.

[the-dude]

AirBNB guests typically don't contribute to the community.

[mikepurvis]

But they probably contribute _more_ to the local economy in terms of partying, dining out, shopping, etc. As someone who lives in a neighbourhood with great community, I wouldn't trade it for anything, but I could see how this might be a struggle for numbers-focused politicians.

[throwaway_USD]

That's why there are zoning laws and regulated properties called hotels. I mean would you want you neighbor to convert their residence to a auto body shop for example? No, and that is a major part of why commercial zoning laws exist.

[mikepurvis]

I think we're saying the same thing. The point of zoning is to protect a commons— an area that we agree collectively will have a particular use even if that use might have lower direct economic value in the short term than some of the other potential uses.

Airbnb works actively to undermine that protection and permit extraction of the short term value, damaging the underlying communities. All I'm saying is that it could be a challenge for short-sighted politicians to look at the economic activity being generated and say "no, we don't want that, take your business elsewhere."

[lmm]

> Nobody is entitled to their property remaining a certain value.

No, but people are entitled to not be damaged by their neighbours' criminal activities. Is it NIMBYism to be angry at the meth lab next door?