The argument seems to be that because the government adopted business operating, they should get a hand.

I'm not sure I buy that. When you're a business owner, you take risks. Also ones that you weren't explicit about.

Suppose the government creates a rule that adds paperwork, so that all businesses now need to pay more to fill in docs. That could easily be the thing that kills certain businesses. Should they get bailed out? This actually happened in my business.

I'm not sure I'd go that far. I think if there is a major, near-unforseeable danger that where public policy requires shutting down business, then I think Bylund has a fair point that it shouldn't be treated as "sucks to be you" entrepreneurial error.

But I also think there's a lot more gray area. What if you were exploiting the fact that something was illegal but not enforced? That doesn't seem to merit a bailout.

What if you were running on extremely tight margins so that a week of lost revenue for any reason, even a justified one like a pandemic, would shut you down? Again, doesn't seem to merit a bailout.

So Airbnb should be bailed out because government imposed the barriers by closing short term rentals.