• downpunxx@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    when push comes to shove, local government will either do the right thing (like this), or put their cities on a ticking clock to disaster and implosion. people need places to live. workers need to live where the work is. if only tourists are able to afford to stay in cities, those places will die.

    • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      And normal housing is not a hotel. If you have people that rent a room or something and you are there you keep an eye out and make sure they behave. Can you imagine your neighboring house or appartment becoming a party flat with people that don’t care how loud they are.

      • nevemsenki@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        If the aim is to curb overtourism and to fix the housing crisis then no, it’s still not fine.

        • RubberDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I don’t know who you think you replied to… but I agree. More is needed.

          This is a good start. Putting hundreds if not thousands of Appartments back on the market for permanent living is good. And at the same time you increase livability in neighborhoods.

          • nevemsenki@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Ah, it was mostly to your point that renting out rooms is fine as long as it’s supervised/closely looked at. Renting out to tourists is bad in my opinion, flat out. Tourists should be lodged at dedicated buildings (hotels/hostels) and the rest should be for local populace.