
Airbnb is providing free housing to refugees and anyone not allowed in the US - peapod91
https://twitter.com/bchesky/status/825517729251684352
======
paulsutter
AirBNB might want to adjust their offer since the majority of the world
population are not allowed in the US. Visas are limited by country and can be
an arduous process.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_United_St...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_the_United_States)

Only visitors from the few countries in blue or green are permitted entry
automatically:

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Visa_policy_of_the_USA....](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Visa_policy_of_the_USA.png)

I mention this without any advocacy for any position, but because some
commenters seem to expect that borders are normally open. Every country has
similar restrictions. Many countries don't admit US citizens without a visa.

Edit: Rayiner, I'm in favor of more and easier travel generally, I'm referring
to the wording of Brian's tweet.

~~~
exodust
I thought this too, but looking a bit further there's already refugees living
in the US in motels and so on, burning through their 'welcome cash'. Not sure
about numbers, I just looked at one example of a family from Afghanistan who
arrived just before the ban. So the housing offered by Airbnb hosts in the US
would be, I presume, for people like this who are living in motels currently.

I wonder what these refugees who made it to the US typically do for housing
once their motel money runs out? Are they on a waiting list for government
housing or something? I guess they would receive welfare payments to cover
rent, or just need to find work.

------
rhapsodic
All of the virtue signaling and moral feather preening surrounding this issue
is something to behold.

It seems we're entering a new era where businesses engage in political
activism as well as simple commerce.

If that's the case, it's only fair that other groups, whose politics may
differ from the activist-businesses', start using politics to weaken those
businesses and counter their influence.

For example, it's well known that Airbnb operates under the radar of housing
regulations in many localities.

Perhaps people who disagree with Airbnb's politics should organize and bring
about legislation that will eliminate or severely curtail Airbnb's ability to
do business in their town, county or state.

Or perhaps the Republicans, though new federal liability laws, should render
Airbnb's business model non-viable at the national level.

The left has been engaging in total war against the right for about a decade.
They seek to impose social and economic penalties on those who hold political
views different than their own. And they've done this, fairly secure in the
knowledge that there would be few or no repercussions against them.

But I have a feeling that's starting to change.

~~~
acjohnson55
> The left has been engaging in total war against the right for about a
> decade.

Funny, I see it as almost the exact opposite. The backlash against Obama was a
weaponization of politics on a scale not seen since the Civil Rights and anti-
Vietnam War movements. I'd characterize the corporate response as businesses
trying to operate in a cosmopolitan market, in a climate of nativist politics.

And your viewpoint feels especially ironic when a common
conservative/libertarian argument against government interventions to advance
civil rights is that the market will work it out. It seems we see how serious
folks actually are about that idea, in these rare instances when it plays
itself out in reality. Because let's also not pretend that this represents
some type of long-term investment in social justice.

And is doubly ironic that you seem to be advocating that the government punish
a private entity for stances that seem well within its rights.

~~~
rhapsodic
_> And is doubly ironic that you seem to be advocating that the government
punish a private entity for stances that seem well within its rights._

It is ironic, I'll admit.

But in total war, there are no rules. You inflict suffering on your enemy by
whatever means are available.

The left gleefully destroyed a family-run pizza joint because of the answer
one of the family members gave to a reporter. They made an example of this
family for the rest of the country to learn from: "Publicly express a
political opinion we disagree with, and run the risk of being destroyed."

It's only fair that Ben Chesky and Airbnb incur a similar risk for their
forays into the political arena. And they're very rich, powerful and well-
connected people, who are backed by other rich, powerful and well-connected
people. It would take something as powerful as a Republican-controlled federal
government to do them some serious damage.

And if that happens, I'm certainly not to rush to their defense.

~~~
grzm
_The left gleefully destroyed a family-run pizza joint_

Would you elaborate on this? What are you referring to?

~~~
rhapsodic
Memories Pizza. Google it.

~~~
grzm
Thanks! If you're going to bring up Memories Pizza, I think it's fair to
compare this to Pizzagate.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizzagate_conspiracy_theory)

The idea that we have no further recourse other than total war is very
troubling. I don't think a lot of people are willing to give up trying to work
together quite yet.

~~~
caminante
The only common denominator appears to be pizza.

Memories Pizza's owners were interviewed about Indiana's Religious Freedom
Restoration Act [0] and answered a hypothetical question by saying they
wouldn't cater a gay wedding, but they'd serve anyone. The reporter ran a
headline, "RFRA: First Michiana business to publicly deny same-sex service."
This was false on numerous levels, but went viral, triggering a backlash.

Pizzagate is a human trafficking conspiracy with different mechanics. I guess
Comet Ping Pong employees got backlash for allegations, but the similarities
end there.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_Freedom_Restoration_Act_\(Indiana\)#Impact)

~~~
grzm
Pizzagate similarly went viral across social media. Is the meaningful
distinction you'd like to make is that it was reported in a newspaper? In this
case, Michael Flynn, then part of Trump's transition team, tweeted vague
insinuations of child sex crimes which surely did nothing to dampen
suspicions.

 _U decide - NYPD Blows Whistle on New Hillary Emails: Money Laundering, Sex
Crimes w Children, etc...MUST READ!_

Even after the shooting, Flynn's son tweeted explicitly:

 _Until #Pizzagate proven to be false, it 'll remain a story. The left seems
to forget #PodestaEmails and the many 'coincidences' tied to it._

Here on HN there were plenty of comments if not actively promoting the
Pizzagate conspiracy theory, entertaining the possibility that it was legit.
The employees of Comet Ping Pong and nearby businesses received backlash,
including death threats. This escalated to a shooting by someone who took it
upon himself it investigate the matter personally. Fortunately no one was
shot. Pizzagate was false on numerous levels.

Both of them are misrepresentations that went viral, supported by people
driven by partisan issues. I think both of them are atrocious and shouldn't be
excused. They are unfortunately a symptom of the terrible state of current
political discourse.

I'm genuinely interested in the distinction you draw between them.

~~~
caminante

      Both of them are misrepresentations that went viral, supported 
      by people driven by partisan issues.
    

Though, I agree this criteria applies to both stories, it's also too general.
Respectfully, this criteria fits ANY news event.

A key distinction I'd draw is that the Memories Pizza saga began due to a
singular mistake in reporting that spun out of control. Had that one mistake
not happened, Memories Pizza likely wouldn't have blown up. Whereas, Pizzagate
became the label for an inter-related network of human trafficking
conspiracies that had already gained critical mass. People that started piling
on, weren't necessarily piling on false-hoods. Instead, they were piling on
unverified conspiracies.

~~~
grzm
Agreed on the "too general" part. Not sure if it's useful to narrow it down,
as I don't think that definition is doing any more work for the discussion.

 _People that started piling on, weren 't necessarily piling on false-hoods.
Instead, they were piling on unverified conspiracies._

What's the distinction here? That on the one hand they're saying "I'm not
sure, but it sure looks suspicious!" and on the other "Look what they did!" Is
that a meaningful distinction?

Why the focus on a singular mistake in reporting?

At the end of it all, adding weight to Memories Pizza with a statement like

 _The left gleefully destroyed a family-run pizza joint because of the answer
one of the family members gave to a reporter._

while dismissing Pizzagate which was arguably fueled in part explicitly by the
Trump campaign (as opposed to some amorphous "left") seems grossly unfair.

I don't think I have anything to add to this. It looks as empty and partisan
as the original comment, unfortunately. I commend you for stepping up and
taking the time to discuss this with me. I honestly appreciate it. I'd have
liked to have heard from 'rhapsodic as well.

------
lllllll
I'm reading around here that Airbnb's contribution in this matter is limited
to providing the infrastructure to volunteer hosts for free, which is still
good. My question is: do they also provide insurance to these hosts? I mean if
one of the volunteer hosts suffers damages in her/his property of 10'000$
hosting refugees, will airbnb cover it? Genuinely curious, not judging here.

~~~
greggh
Right here:
[https://www.airbnb.com/guarantee](https://www.airbnb.com/guarantee)

The $1,000,000 Host Guarantee

------
rhapsodic
The tweet should have said, "Airbnb is helping people to provide free housing
to refugees and anyone not allowed in the US."

------
wyager
Are they planning to force people on the platform to host refugees (paid,
obviously)? I can see several practical problems with that; taking people from
their home to a place where they do not speak the language or know the local
culture and just dropping them off in standard residential housing can't end
well for anybody. This also can't help AirBnB's case when it comes to
NIMBYism.

~~~
nollbit
Why would it be more of a problem with refugees than other, paying guests?

Afaik, most US citizens staying at Japanese AirBnB's (for example) do not
speak Japanese nor know the local culture. Do you think that's a problem as
well? When I stayed at an AirBnB in Italy I knew nothing about the local
culture nor spoke the language, nobody thought that was an issue.

Or is this just, you know, racism?

~~~
ordinary
Tourists do not commonly suffer from PTSD and a host of other mental problems.
There are real, valid reasons why you don't just dump them in a random suburb
and let them fend for themselves.

Incidentally, insulting people is not conducive to healthy debate. Please
consider whether calling your opponent (or their actions) racist will increase
our ability to persuade them to change their position, or just make them
entrench their position (even against more persuasive arguments).

------
edoceo
Stunt or Stand? So much noise right now it's hard to tell. Hope Time
demonstrates this as a genuine move. BigCo with lots of PR weight can really
keep the story at the top (or push it over the top)

~~~
chandsie
I'm an employee, so for what it's worth, this isn't something out of the blue.
Airbnb has a disaster response program that gets activated all the time for
natural disasters and other tragedies - [https://www.airbnb.com/disaster-
response](https://www.airbnb.com/disaster-response)

We're choosing to activate it in response to the executive order because it
goes directly against our company mission to let people belong anywhere. I'm
sure PR was part of the decision but if it helps people, I'd take it at face
value.

~~~
cronjobber
Stunt, then, as AirBNB isn't providing any free housing. You're just going to
browbeat people who offered _" housing to displaced neighbors and relief
workers"_ to underwrite "your" provision of housing to people who are neither
neighbors nor relief workers.

~~~
petervandijck
Let's be clear: if you are taking a public stand against the president of the
United State who is known to be vindictive, you are taking a stand. ALL OF
THEM. It is never just a stunt, because a stunt means there's no risk.

~~~
bogomipz
>"It is never just a stunt, because a stunt means there's no risk."

I'm sorry I fail to see what risk has now been assumed by AirBnB by having a
cofounder send out a Tweet.

~~~
moonka
You say that as if nothing important happens on twitter, but as we have seen
recently, the president pays a lot of attention to twitter.

~~~
bogomipz
Its not a comment on the importance of Twitter. But rather composing a tweet
requires no considerable effort. Its the same as when people change their FB
profile pic and considerate it action.

An action that involved real effort would have been a twee that contained a
link to the AirBnB's program to help alleviate the problems faced by refugees.

The President of the US is an odd example because that runs counter to your
point I believe. Trump Tweets are the ultimate symbol of vacuousness, vanity
and impulse.

------
Neliquat
No they are not. Please correct the title.

~~~
exodust
Surely the tweet means that Airbnb are paying the fee that otherwise would be
paid by guests? We only have the tweet to go on, so what makes you think
otherwise?

~~~
icebraining
An employee on this thread linked to their Disasters Program, where this even
will appear, and which works like that.

~~~
sokoloff
No, it doesn't.

Airbnb waives the airbnb fees, but does not pay the host for accommodations
offered under the program. To me, that is not "Airbnb is providing free
housing".

~~~
icebraining
Sorry, I wasn't clear. By "like that", I meant not paying the host :)

------
coldtea
Translation: "AirBnB looks for cheap positive publicity".

------
known
Illegal immigrant? [http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2017/01/29/indian-american-
who-...](http://www.huffingtonpost.in/2017/01/29/indian-american-who-inspired-
swades-detained-questioned-about-i/)

------
icebraining
So to be clear, Airbnb is helping volunteering hosts to provide their houses
for free, right? If so, this tweet is misleading, from its wording I expected
Airbnb was compensating the hosts.

~~~
exodust
They should take it a step further and pay the hosts double to accommodate
refugees. After all, if any guests are the sort to hang around the house all
day instead of seeing the sights, it's refugees. They don't have sight-seeing
money, and they have more luggage than normal guests. They're kind of stressed
out too, due to being refugees.

------
camus2
Airbnb IS NOT providing free housing. Airbnb isn't paying for housing
refugees. Potential hosts can offer free housing, which just makes Airbnb like
Couchsurfing. So Airbnb isn't paying for anything here or even giving anything
for free.

People who really want to help can use CouchSurfing web site instead of
promoting a for profit business.

If Airbnb offered free housing it would mean they would actually pay the host
to house refugees, they are not.

~~~
exodust
How do you know this?

------
ssijak
Why have not you done that before for existing homeless people or other people
in need? This just smells like ugly marketing scheme.

I mean, it is good if someone in need is helped, but why now and why that
wording and scope to only refugees?

~~~
ivan_gammel
That's dumb argument, sorry. Disaster relief is temporary and help is provided
to people who suffer from external circumstances. Housing for homeless is a
daily job for the government and it is different, significantly bigger
problem, for which the solution is not affordable for any single private
organization or person. Private organizations have limited resources and they
have the right to choose whom to support first. Moreover, here the main
support comes not from Airbnb, but from the hosts who offer their houses for
free. Airbnb contribution here is to provide a web service for hosts and
people in the need and not to take money for that.

~~~
ssijak
Well, US gov (Clinton and Obama) created this refugees in the first place.
They are all coming from the areas that this administrations ruined in one way
or another.

~~~
devb
There's a small eight year gap in your list there.

~~~
ssijak
yeah I forgot him, just wanted to say that it is not new politics or just
Obama but many recent presidents

------
f137
Nice test.

I wonder how many of the people protesting the entry ban will offer their
flats for free to the refugees?

------
savvyraccoon
Airbnb's investors are happy :)

------
Dorothy1989
For unemployed people who have lost their homes and live on the streets or for
thousands of homeless poor Americans, AirBn(another Soros backed company) was
never so sensitive. But for refugees who can afford the 1000+ $ trip to the
States, Airbn is so humane. Please, my mind hurts.

------
return0
Unfortunately this will look like a PR move. Why can't ordinary people step in
to host the people affected for this short period?

~~~
petervandijck
Good idea too, but that's harder to organize (on a practical level and at
scale).

------
flashman
Airbnb should run a promotion for free nights at hosts who live within a mile
of a Trump property. He'd notice if someone was trying to take business off
him, even nominally.

~~~
forgetsusername
> _Airbnb should run a promotion for free nights at hosts who live within a
> mile of a Trump property._

How much longer do you think AirBnB's regulation flouting would last if they
went to war with the President?

~~~
kristianc
Given that the benefits of renting ones house out on Airbnb accrue almost
exclusively to coastal 'liberals' the regulation flouting is possibly not long
for this world anyway.

------
Tulip68
Excellent news on an otherwise pretty terrible day.

Brian Chesky and the entire Airbnb team are showing America at its very best:
forward-looking, innovative, diverse, multicultural and. The contrast with the
Trump-type people -- primarily angry, insular, bitter old people who are
terrified of brown people and still live within 10 minutes of their high
school -- could not be more striking.

~~~
lllllll
I dont think such generalizations will help much. You are displaying yourself
as angry, insular and bitter. Consider the option of trying to understand ppl
with different opinions, however disgusting Trump's speeches are - IMHO they
are.

------
akjainaj
If you do this please then release the % of users who've been told "you've
been chosen to host a Muslim refugee" and have accepted ;^}

It's easy to pretend you're hospitable and generous when you're not paying the
toll of your actions. You're not providing "free housing", the actual owners
of the houses are. This is a unilateral announcement because you don't know if
hosts will accept.

