During a recent government meeting, a heated discussion emerged surrounding the concept of housing as a basic human right and its implications for property owners. One participant expressed strong opposition to the idea, arguing that if individuals invest their labor into creating something, such as a tool, it should not be considered a right for others to claim. This perspective raised concerns about the potential for what was described as \"free labor\" or even \"slavery.\"

The conversation also highlighted the stark differences in rental prices between Wayne County and Washtenaw County. The speaker noted that their three-bedroom rental in Westland is significantly cheaper than a similar property in Ypsilanti, emphasizing the economic disparities within the region.

Furthermore, the participant voiced apprehension regarding proposed non-discrimination ordinances, stating that such regulations could inadvertently limit housing availability. In response to these concerns, they revealed that they had entered into private contracts with charity organizations, effectively reserving six rental units exclusively for these groups. This decision was framed as a protective measure against the perceived burdens of background checks and other requirements that could arise from new regulations.

The speaker concluded by asserting that market forces would dictate responses to regulatory changes, indicating that their strategy would now focus on higher-end properties, which they believed would be less affected by the issues raised. This shift in approach underscores the complexities and unintended consequences that can arise from housing policy discussions.