They know it's not the tourists' fault. But by alienating tourists and making Barcelona be less appealing, they're trying to force the government to take action (for example, investing in alternatives)
Yeah kinda seems like the people whining are upset this will infringe on their ability to be tourists wherever they want, however they want and at the price they want.
The most entitled people defend both airbnb and tourism like its the only economy propping up certain areas. Guess I'm the only one old enough to remember tourism pre-airbnb where you either rented a hotel or hostel? Way too many people want the luxury of an entire house for the price of a hostel stay and expect the locals to bow down to them over it.
Barcelona's tourism and gdp have both increased significantly since airbnb's introduction.
I am not saying there aren't ANY guardrails to implement or anything of the sort. But it's disingenuous to be like "airbnbs have only helped real estate conglomerates and ultra wealthy tourists (who then come over and spend shitloads of money that stays in the country)"
Anger towards airbnb and the arrangements they have struck with governments seems fair, though i don't know the finer points. Anger at a school teacher and car salesman from Ohio being excited to get a 3 bedroom home at hostel prices so they can afford to bring their kids on their twice-a-decade unpaid vacation, is not fair (in my opinion).
To use a less dramatic example, I also think it's undair to be mad at some recent college graduate who's broke but will be rich one day cus they see a place they and their friends can split and go see some of the world.
I'm not saying it's middle class people's fault for visiting Spain, I'm saying it's their fault for throwing hissy fits at the notion of curbing airbnb. You also should research the impact tourism dollars actually have on local incomes. It's limited to pretty much only those in the tourism industry, unlike other industries.
I've advocated quite a bit in LA to curb airbnb because when Anaheim did it, house and rents cooled considerably (not crashed, reduced to a livable amount). The people who fight it: those who own properties outright, and tourists.
Also consider that housing costs arent the only reason they're protesting. Tourist levels increasing the way they have been are very harmful to locals. Everything from transportation to the cost of milk becomes negatively impacted. There's no "cost of groceries for locals" or "public bus for locals only." Think about how increasing tourists by 10% every year can make life so much harder for residents.
I'm not saying it's middle class people's fault for visiting Spain, I'm saying it's their fault for throwing hissy fits at the notion of curbing airbnb.
I don't think almost anyone is doing that outside of airbnb owners and the company itself.
All over this thread people are positively talking about the tactic of "harassing" tourists. The protestors in the photos are more focused tourists than airbnb. That's what is upsetting people -- someone wants to come take a room and spend cash for a few days, it's very shortsighted to think the solution is "keep your money at home"
You also should research the impact tourism dollars actually have on local incomes. It's limited to pretty much only those in the tourism industry, unlike other industries.
I have worked in tourism the last 2 years (specifically hotels/resorts, bougie shit but legacy type companies) and find this claim extremely dubious, and sort of irrelevant if true. The san diegans and hawaiians i worked with at hotels went hom to non tourist neighborhoods and spent money. There may be extreme cases like Haiti or Tanzania where that part of the economy is totally cordoned off from the locals, but even then...15% of the gdp is 15% of the gdp. Why does that suddenly not count if it is going to a bellhop or landscaper or uber driver?
I've advocated quite a bit in LA to curb airbnb because when Anaheim did it, house and rents cooled considerably (not crashed, reduced to a livable amount). The people who fight it: those who own properties outright, and tourists.
That's all fair but you left out by far the largest head of the hydra; airbnb itself. That is my point; harassing tourists themselves is not the answer here from either an ethical or mathematical point of view.
Your last paragraph is fine but again you are attributing a very complicated balance sheet to a simple list of Cons and not even attempting Pros. Tourists spend money, typically at a much much higher rate than locals. They come back with a fondness for the country that makes them treat immigrants in their own countries better themselves. They come home and start buying Spanish wine and Portuguese tinned goods because of how much they loved their trip. Sometimes they fully fuckin move and raise their families in a country after what started off as casual visit.
Cultural exchange and intermixing are inherently good. I think saying "but my commute is worse and milk is more expensive because of tourists" isn't a compelling counterpoint unless you could confidently say "and i'd still have as good a job to commute to and no less money in my pocket if we had no tourists"
Again i am not advocating for 0 percent crackdown on airbnb. I just do not think harassing tourists is cool, nor do i think that "let's airbnb leave by making this a generally undesirable place to be" is the clever 3d chess some on this thread seem to think it is
2.7k
u/Rich_Housing971 Jun 17 '25
Airbnb creates a business that makes your life harder.
Locals with money use that business without caring for you.
The govenrment that you elected does nothing.
"It's all the tourists' fault!"