Airnb, like Uber, needs to be run out of town

18 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport
Airnb, like Uber, needs to be run out of town

Like Uber, Airnb needs to be run out of town

Airbnb in Canada: 10% of hosts account for most of revenue, McGill study finds

http://globalnews.ca/news/3655064/airbnb-canada-commercial-property-owners/

NorthReport

'They're basically running hotels': Property management companies Airbnb's biggest winners

San Francisco-based Sonder lists 168 Montreal properties, mostly in Plateau-Mont-Royal, Ville-Marie

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/airbnb-study-montreal-1.4237710

NorthReport

Large commercial operators a growing concern in the Airbnb market, study says

Airbnb hosts in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver earned $430 million last year with the top 1 per cent of hosts taking $51.7 million, report finds.

https://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2017/08/04/large-commercial-opera...

NorthReport

Police investigate false Airbnb listing in Stouffville

 

http://www.680news.com/2017/08/06/police-investigate-false-airbnb-listin...

NorthReport

We have community standards so let's kick them out for ruining our rental housing stock and for lying to the public This is not the type of corporate citizen we want in Canada

https://www.biv.com/article/2017/8/airbnb-has-likely-removed-almost-4000...

NorthReport
NorthReport

Uber will unfortunately die a slow death in BC whereas a quick death would be better

 

http://www.news1130.com/2017/08/10/uber-launches-fleet-mapping-vehicles-...

Sean in Ottawa

NorthReport wrote:

Uber will unfortunately die a slow death in BC whereas a quick death would be better

 

http://www.news1130.com/2017/08/10/uber-launches-fleet-mapping-vehicles-...

Why and how?

I am not a supporter of Uber but its main argument is based on being cheaper. That is hard to beat. and people are generally not happy with taxi service as it is.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
I am not a supporter of Uber but its main argument is based on being cheaper.

Conversely, I think the main argument against it is that it's a publicly traded company.  If Uber were a worker-owned co-op I think we'd hear more about how it's better to support independents than to line the pockets of the owners of Beck Taxi.  But as long as Uber also has owners, we hear how they're driving those long-suffering Beck drivers out of business by slashing costs and making a ride too convenient.

NorthReport

It has a extremely sick corporate culture and this driverless car nonsense is exactly that nonsense as we are not going to have driverless cars in our lifetimes More importantly what's wrong with taking public transit or a taxi which we have been doing for many years

lagatta4

Well, public transport is not adequate everywhere, as we all know.

I don't know whether it is an air b&b or just noisy neighbours but there is a place on the street behind mine (across the lane) where they seem to be partying late at night at least on the weekends and sometimes during the week. They woke me up, and my bedroom is more towards the front of the flat. I'm sure I'm not the only person pissed off about this.

I have friends in the Plateau, just south of here and they are infested with air b&bs.

Another problem is that the hospitality industry should adapt. There should be more hotel rooms with a kitchen nook at least; most people I know don't want to go out to restaurants 3 times a day. No, they aren't necessarily cooking; some are just opting for takeaway.

voice of the damned

NorthReport wrote:

It has a extremely sick corporate culture and this driverless car nonsense is exactly that nonsense as we are not going to have driverless cars in our lifetimes More importantly what's wrong with taking public transit or a taxi which we have been doing for many years

I'm skeptical that we're gonna be seeing mass usage of driverless cars anytime in the next few decades(you'd have to MAJORLY re-boot the transportation infrastructure, not to mention traffic laws and insurance rules, just for starters), but I'm not sure I'd describe the idea as "sick". 

We're cool with the idea that we don't need to actively steer an elevator to get from one floor of a building to another, so what's so awful about applying the same principle to cars?

 

NorthReport
Rev Pesky

From voice of the damned:

We're cool with the idea that we don't need to actively steer an elevator to get from one floor of a building to another, so what's so awful about applying the same principle to cars?

Normally there's only one elevator in an elevator shaft. Normally, the elevator has very restricted movements. That is, it goes up and down. It does not turn, go side to side, speed up or slow down for no apparent reason, etc.

If you had a road that was absolutely straight, only one car on the road, and a preset number of stops, it could operate as an elevator does. It would also be more or less useless.

voice of the damned

Rev Pesky wrote:

From voice of the damned:

We're cool with the idea that we don't need to actively steer an elevator to get from one floor of a building to another, so what's so awful about applying the same principle to cars?

Normally there's only one elevator in an elevator shaft. Normally, the elevator has very restricted movements. That is, it goes up and down. It does not turn, go side to side, speed up or slow down for no apparent reason, etc.

If you had a road that was absolutely straight, only one car on the road, and a preset number of stops, it could operate as an elevator does. It would also be more or less useless.

Right. I was assuming that, in the scenario of driverless cars becoming a reality, they would be more or less as safe as elevators(this is usually the claim made about them), or at least no more dangerous than cars are now. Obviously, if DCs are going to kill more people than currently die on the roads, it would indeed be sick to want them as the norm. But I'm not sure if that's what North Report meant by "sick".

North Report:

The article you linked to is fairly long. Would you be able to write up a short TL/DR explaining how it argues that driverless cars are the sign of a sick corporate culture?

 

Sean in Ottawa

The market and a fight between responsibility and a desire for lower prices are not going to resolve issues such as those raised by Uber. If we thought so we would probably trust the market and be right wing.

You fight these things with a combination of policies favourable to workers, environment, consumers, that work to achieve greater equality. The transportation specific policies have to do with restrictions on cars and support for public transit. No presumptions of the coming death of Uber can take the place of rational policies.

Uber is really a fairly rational response to a public failure to protect workers, the public, the environment and to support public transit. Cities ought to be redesigned to offer fewer advantages to having cars.

It is this realization that is needed. And no, I am not holding my breath.

 

NorthReport

Bingo!

You beat me to it!

Rev Pesky wrote:

From voice of the damned:

We're cool with the idea that we don't need to actively steer an elevator to get from one floor of a building to another, so what's so awful about applying the same principle to cars?

Normally there's only one elevator in an elevator shaft. Normally, the elevator has very restricted movements. That is, it goes up and down. It does not turn, go side to side, speed up or slow down for no apparent reason, etc.

If you had a road that was absolutely straight, only one car on the road, and a preset number of stops, it could operate as an elevator does. It would also be more or less useless.

voice of the damned

So then, driverless cars will lead to more accidents?