So much text, so little substance. Let's sum up your arguments for why this is good.
1) HN wouldn't understand because they're young men
2) Value of property in an area can go down
3) Property can suffer damages
4) Rentals may inconvenience neighbors
All these points can be overcome without eroding our property rights. While values of homes can go down, they can also go up. Property can be damaged, but it can also be insured. Rentals may inconvenience neighbors, but disturbing the peace is already a crime.
The GP said that having too many renters increases the risk of property damage (which is very true), to which you replied (essentially) - why worry, let them damage, the insurance will pick the tab - to which I said that it's the actual damage, not the cost of repairs that is an issue.
Rules regarding the rental of private property to a private party is a private matter in my opinion. Private parties already regulate the user of communal property thru vehicles such as a HOA. If you have a condo then the HOA can decide if renting is appropriate. Having the government dictate how your property can be used is more disturbing than having to attend a HOA meeting. Sure, you might agree with this particular regulation, but how about when the other political party takes power and decides they want to use your property differently. No thank you.
1) HN wouldn't understand because they're young men
2) Value of property in an area can go down
3) Property can suffer damages
4) Rentals may inconvenience neighbors
All these points can be overcome without eroding our property rights. While values of homes can go down, they can also go up. Property can be damaged, but it can also be insured. Rentals may inconvenience neighbors, but disturbing the peace is already a crime.