[rightbyte]

AirBnB did 'eliminate' the NIMBYs by sidestepping local zoning laws.

And the outcome was bad for people living in these targets for mass tourism. Unless they were a YIMBY of course and wanted a hostel in their backyard.

'NIMBY' is like 'Karen' or 'boomer'. Some sort of convenient scapegoat, deserving or not.

[JackYoustra]

I could turn around and say "the outcome was bad for people willing to receive all of the benefits of a free-to-travel society in a bustling town but none of the costs." Of course if you say "mass tourism" it's bad, but idk, do you like to travel? If hundreds of thousands want to visit a beautiful town, should we limit supply in a way that makes it impossible for them to visit? There are millions of alternatives (you could ban lyft or cars for non-natives, you could restrict development to a resort and gated community on one part of town, etc) but the whole reason it's called NIMBY is because the only alternative NIMBYs have is freezing a town in amber while claiming a triple lock raise in pensions.

Zoning laws are, for the most part, a mistake. Any solution to housing prices that isn't a boost in supply either leads to scarcity or hideous Danwei-style planning that reaches into peoples life plans and the ability to afford a future.