No I don’t at all see how you’re linking paying and non paying guests together…
Do your uncles and aunties book on Airbnb then ?
Governments may do what they want, but we should not make it easy for them and advocating such an attitude is incomprehensible. At least we have the judiciary for now.
Ok. Lol. Never mind.
Seriously the two do not follow for me. One is a case of the government being interested in specific economic activity… can someone explain why if they’re looking at Airbnb data they’re also looking at private guests …genuinely I can’t understand why the two are linked.
The U.S. Government has a history of stating that they want information for a purpose that the public supports, then using the legal ruling that gave them the right to the information to gain access to information that the public wouldn’t approve of them obtaining. For example, when the FBI asked Apple to create a program to hack into the San Bernardino mass shooter’s cell phone they portrayed it as an extreme circumstance. In reality, they had hundreds of other cell phones they planned to access if Apple created the program. The Patriot Act is being used to gather information on people who are not accused of terrorism.
3 Likes
Economics = $ information
$ information = dollars, cents
Not names and dates. You don’t need guest names for taxation purposes.
1 Like
If only everyone was able to spend a year or two working in Scandinavia, i wonder if we wouldn’t be able to get rid of these kind of paranoid libertarian idea altogether.
2 Likes
I was going to mention this! The CCTV cameras are everywhere! It’s a bit disconcerting to be honest!
Yep!! “We need to cut back on your civil liberties to keep you safe.” Yup.
1 Like
Zandra – I don’t know exactly why cities are asking for more information than simply income info that they need for tax purposes. But I would venture a guess that it has to do with the slippery slope sprayed with WD40 that HappyLittleHost refers to, as well as what EllenN says about how the government tends to just try to get more and more info…
What info are cities asking that Airbnb give them? Well take the case of Chicago:
“The law requires Airbnb to share with the government … Information about who they (eg the hosts) have as guests, where they live, how much they paid, how long they stayed. "
Interesting aspects of the Chicago STR law…which the Chicago hosts are upset about…
“…a woman who prefers to host only female Airbnb guests will now be
in violation of the Chicago Human Rights ordinance if she elects to register as a “shared
housing unit,” and even if she rents to a man, she would also be in violation of this
provision if she refuses to let this man sleep in her bed or enter into her bedroom or her
private bathroom (“full use of such public accommodation”)”
“Maintenance of Records – each registered host must keep, for 3 years,
records of all guests, including (i) name, (ii) contact information, (iii)
signature and (iv) dates of accommodation. Each host is also required to
make these registry records available for inspection to “any authorized city
official … upon request.”
Where does on start with these issues?
From my perspective, we’re living in an unprecedented time; we’re in the age of Big Data. We have the ability to collect, store and process a huge amount of information very efficiently. One of the issue is the US government (and all governments) face is the ability to process that data. They’re just not good at it. They also probably don’t need the information they’re asking for, either. It is always worthwhile to ask, “Why do you need this information?” - Constitution or not. If you think the government is over-reaching then you need to let your representative know. Not just from your rights, but from an economic perspective. It is a waste of time and money (taxes) to collect, store and process unnecessary information.
The Australian government passed data retention laws on ISPs, and despite being multi-billion dollar companies, the government had to give money to the ISPs to store the data. It was metadata and doesn’t give the level of detail that news sites were claiming, and wouldn’t be that informative. I was more upset that Government was wasting time and money (taxes) instead of getting on with the job of running the country.
We need to engage more with government - ask the question; state our position; etc. Let them know it’s not ok. Not just from a Constitutional point of view, but from a practical and financial point of view.
The US is different than other ex-British colonies. First, Canada, Australia, etc. are still chillin’ in the Commonwealth with the Queen as head of state. We have Parliaments and our Prime Ministers aren’t directly elected. While Australia has a Constitution, there is no Bill of Rights. These countries weren’t impacted by a War of Independence which has sat deep in the country’s psyche for centuries. This informs some of the viewpoints people have, and reactions to government. There is a deep-seated mistrust of government as we see on this thread. It also explains why sales tax is added on at the register rather than being included in the shelf-price.
But, as I go back to my first point, this is a new age. While you should have a healthy suspicion about your government (it keeps the bastards honest), it’s really the large corporations that can process the data you should be concerned about - Facebook, Google, Uber, etc. If you have a smart phone with GPS and a data connection, even more information is being held about you.
You have a choice about what company gets your information; and you have a choice to influence your government about the data it collects.
I have never, ever heard or could even imagine of any true business entity (aka Airbnb) who welcomes in any shape or form having to gather and then hand over willingly information about its own customers to any government agency. It is an unnatural act. The two entities are natural adversaries; business entities are risk-taking entrepreneurs and their life blood is having to be efficient and profitable; government lives off the populace they govern (via taxes) and when unnecessary too big, are then afforded the luxury of being exceptionally wasteful (think of the $140 screw driver), slow, incompetent (think of when it tries to actually produce something, its hilarious) and even corrupt; they have no competition, or answer to anyone, till re-election time. If the populace votes the same lot in, expect no change in the culture.
The US Government is now, by far, the nation’s largest employer and becoming bigger at an alarming rate, before and after 9/11. Serving in government was originally thought of as a ‘public service’, and now is the best guaranteed lucrative career in town.
If have the time or inclination, read: https://markstoval.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/how-many-people-work-for-government/
@Lucy_R, Oh, I’m with you. This thread is starting to make my eye roll back into my head to be honest.
2 Likes
That is not a real answer… there are many variations of privacy laws, and the UK is very weak with some and strong with others. They just happen to be the opposite of the USA’s. And, yes I understand that you will come back with the “you don’t know about laws in the UK” [though somehow you know all about our laws] but in fact, the person who I talk with about this subject was, until recently in the House of Commons, but has recently been knighted, so is now in the House of Lords. This person is quite knowledgable about the laws in the UK. I won’t identify this person by giving you their credentials… however I don’t believe that a member of your own government would be too mistaken.
In broad brush stroke, the UK protects the privacy of its citizen from corporate data collection and sales; and offers very little protection from government surveillance. The USA has allowed businesses to cull our data with very few restrictions and, at least on paper, while has strong restrictions on information that our government can collect without a judge’s order.
These are the two biggest areas of “privacy” but there are more. A one sentence statement about privacy law simply ignores all nuance and context. For that reason, I think that statement was inaccurate and misleading.
2 Likes
Wait what ? Where did I say I know all about your laws @anon67190644 ? I’ve said in a few places in this thread that I don’t know and don’t need to know … I’m not American ! So many posters on here saying : you’ll no doubt know about x… no I don’t know about x.
Frankly I find your reply misleading …I’ve never pretended to be an authority on US privacy law but I have asked questions as I find the point of view on this thread … difficult to relate to.
One thing I do agree on is what our privacy laws protect us on … i said exactly what you’ve just said about UK data protection several comments up …
EDIT: i should actually have said ‘data protection laws’ in my reply to Kona; privacy laws was a mistake that I’ve only just noticed and it was in reference to an earlier comment stating the same.
@Magwitch Before I found this forum I was part of a Facebook group that was very heavily moderated, invite only, and it became such a Libertarian free-for-all that one person was reprimanded by the moderator for using the word “inclusive” - the Mod called it “liberal mumbo-jumbo.” That one cracked me up.
1 Like
I’m not sure how this conversation is Libertarian or did you mean Liberal? Conservatives in this country largely don’t care what information the government collects.
Cats, you flaming liberal!!! 
Ha! Well, that group drove out a number of folks of all stripes. Plus, it was invite only and you had to be vetted. At the time I had a Facebook icon of Lincoln that said “You know what else was an Executive Order that bypassed Congress and effected millions? The Emancipation Proclamation, Bitches!” I wasn’t allowed in until I changed my profile pic. That should have been my first clue. Just much, much, much more moderated than this group. By far. God, how did they even find the time?