There is a large supply of housing that is available to customers that want to purchase it. The idea that two people can't make a consensual exchange of value is antithetical to a free society.
This is a good thing, and this is not antithetical to a free society.
Both Uber and AirBnB knowingly break the law as part of their business model.
Zoning doesn't allow the kind of business that AirBnB has, they just don't care.
One could very well argue that maybe the laws need reform (as I do) but that's another story; the inherent ethos of YC et. al. is to err on the side of breaking the rules.
Surely that's true, but nobody can agree on which exact rules need to be broken. :)
So you'll forgive me when I call the police because you're building favelas in your back yard and have 20 micro-rentals.
If you rely on the power of the state to be the ultimate enforcer of contracts and property rights, the state has the right and duty to delineate which contracts it will enforce.
Unless you explain why, you're doing nothing to persuade anyone of anything other than employees at AirBnB disagree with the prevailing sentiment of HN. Having met the founders of AirBnB, I am incredibly skeptical of your claim, but I am willing to listen to what you have to say.
This is BS. Those "regular" people just want rental market to collapse so they can live in center of the city for pennies.
It's nobody's business if someone rents apartment. If you can't afford it - you can't afford it.
My town prohibits leases under a week but that hasn’t stopped AirBnb from accepting listings there.
Good. If law is stupid company must defend it's interest and at the same time - hard earning hosts too. I don't see which law is being broken if those are fought in court.