[rexpress]

If we're going for hyperbolic examples, imagine being a single mother who works a lot and also has a limited income. Her convenient local shop has been replaced by a mini delivery warehouse burning through VC capital that was able to offer the landlord a better rental rate, but charges customers twice what the older shop did for the kid's medication...

[bko]

The difference is in my example you're preventing someone from using a service that someone agreed to provide for an agreed upon price.

Your example is a hand-wavy hypothetical about how allowing some service impacts others by second and third order effects by what could be there instead.

Do you see the difference?

[rexpress]

The hand-wavy hypotheticals were there in both of our posts.

And where you said "It's none of your business what 10% of people are doing. I don't know how it degrades quality of life" you were also explicitly hand-waving away the costs that these businesses impose on those not directly involved in the transactions.

So yes, in my post I was at least considering these costs. In your post, you were choosing to wave them away as inconsequential. I certainly do see the difference.