[lbwtaylor]

It's just basic urban planning and zoning. You can't run a factory in your apartment and you can't run a hotel. Plenty of cities restrict where hotels can operate. This is nothing special and certainly not authoritarian. These measures are quite popular because, shocking, people in residential neighborhoods like have real neighbors rather than hotel guests.

[hombre_fatal]

Yes, obviously everyone wants to be the last person allowed to move in somewhere, that's why they support these sorts of policies that foment resentment. NIMBYism also stifles most development in the US. But I don't see how it's not authoritarian.

Giving these 10k flats to locals isn't going to put a dent in the housing economy.

[edoloughlin]

> But I don't see how it's not authoritarian.

If this thread continues for a few more levels, I think you’ll end up justifying hiring your own private police force.

Ownership requires that a state exists to enforce your rights. There are tradeoffs with this arrangement, one of which is that the state gets to set boundaries/limits on how you can use the thing you own. Ideally, acting with the best interests of the population. This sometimes includes ensuring areas are off limits to transient inhabitants so that a society can develop.

[stavros]

If you think zoning is authoritarian, you also think a bunch of normal, everyday measures are authoritarian.

[happytoexplain]

> everyone wants to be the last person allowed to move in

This is uncharitable. What everybody wants is for the place they call home, either by inheritance or hard work, to not be harmed by overdevelopment. People will have varyingly (un)reasonable opinions on what "over" means, but even a place with zero development has new residents - people do not live in one place forever, nor do they live forever.