[bawolff]

Personally i'd rather there just be more housing so the market can balance out.

Like in theory, all things being equal, long term rentals should be much better for the landlord. You don't have to worry about vaccines in the downtime, you dont have to clean/etc between tenants, you have less regulatory concerns (in theory), long term tenants have incentive to be respectful to neighbours and not destroy the place.

But there is just more demand for short term. Personally i would rather there was just more housing in general (maybe that's naive).

There are definitely some nice things about staying in an airbnb other than costs - having a full kitchen, having a bit more "room" [especially if travelling in a group], usually being in an area near things like grocery stores and less near generic tourism BS.

[throw_m239339]

> Personally i'd rather there just be more housing so the market can balance out.

to build houses there is a need for a underlying infrastructure (roads, electric grids, gaz pipes, whatever...). Who's going to pay for all that when often existing ones are barely maintained?

Now cities could have more skyscrappers to house more people as well... but there is a lot of NIMBY involved as well, it's a complex subject.

I'm not opposed to Airbnb as long as they are subject to the exact same standards and laws as hotels, in dedicated buildings for instance. Obviously, very little hosts would want that.

Airbnb'ing an appartement can drastically affect the quality of life for neighbors as well.

[Ekaros]

Taxation is a interesting thing. In some countries those utilities like roads and their upkeep is paid from income taxes. And Airbnb renters don't pay income tax. Maybe it would be reasonable to move that burden to be a tax on such renting. With long term rentals the income tax isn't a problem.

[rootsudo]

In most of the big airbnb markets, it is assessed via Property Taxes.

City taxes may make up a portion, but if you break down where the money goes, it usually is schools, and emergency responders, not per se utilities, easements or roads.

[Ekaros]

Maybe in USA. In many European countries the property tax is low sub-1% range. Which isn't nearly enough to cover those services.

[throwaway201103]

> to build houses there is a need for a underlying infrastructure (roads, electric grids, gaz pipes, whatever...). Who's going to pay for all that

For a new development, the developers pay for it, either by actually installing the infrastructure themselves or by paying "connection fees" to the utilities to establish the service. For a truly "greenfield" development they also build the roads, which may stay private or be turned over to public ownership.

Ongoing, the gas/water/electric customers pay for maintenance as part of the cost of the service.

Where I live, the only utility persistently moaning about cost of maintenance and infrastructure is the water/sewer service, which is run by the city. Gas and electric are private utilities and they seem to just deal with it.

[bawolff]

> Who's going to pay for all that

Taxpayers! That is what a government is for after all.

To be clear, i think airbnbs should be subject to appropriate taxes in order to pay their share of that sort of thing.

I'm also not sure why this would be such an issue with airbnb relative to normal long term rentals. Its not like an airbnb uses roads & electric grids differently than a normal tenant.

> I'm not opposed to Airbnb as long as they are subject to the exact same standards and laws as hotels

Why not the same standard as BnB's or traditional short term rentals of small dwellings? Its not like hotels have ever had a monopoly on short term rentals to tourists.