I agree with you on that. I never said they have a right to live there. I asked OP why the people who don't own that property, and have no ties to it (other th

I agree with you on that. I never said they have a right to live there. I asked OP why the people who don't own that property, and have no ties to it (other than potentially living near it), should be able to decide that others _can't_ live there through restrictive zoning. If it's actually a free market, and people have interest and money to afford to live in an area, and a property owner has property and interest to build housing they can afford, why should people with no interest in the property get to decide they should live elsewhere?