That, presumably, is one reason supply is restricted ("fixed"), along with other restrictive laws, like height or density limits, forced parking minimums, etc.

Another contributor is poor transportation infrastructure, which limits peoples' flexibility, creating more pressure on housing near train lines and stations, etc.

> That, presumably, is one reason supply is restricted ("fixed")

(I'm the grandparent.) Yes, this. I'm all for new construction to improve supply and a streamlined bureaucratic process so that it can happen more quickly.

Practically speaking though, you can look at any city that's had a problem with AirBnB (Berlin, San Francisco, New York, Barcelona, etc. — pretty much anywhere desirable to visit) and new stock isn't coming online anywhere close to quickly enough to counteract the market forces introduced by AirBnB. As it stands today, building is a very slow process, and it's likely to remain that way for the foreseeable future.

This is all fair and true, but then why isn't the answer "fix the outdated housing regulations that are driving rents sky high", which is likely to have a bigger impact than banning AirBnB.

And if you dig into the anti-housing discourse, you'll find there are also several good reasons for that.

Like what?

Insufficient infrastructure - water, electricity, transport, increase in (already problematic) traffic, preserving the character of the city / neighborhoods, kicking people out of their homes, gentrification, zoning plans.