IMO, there is a reasonable complaint that people who live somewhere for 30 years might be continuously paying for infrastructure that&#x27;s only needed because more people moved into the area.  Basically, when an area needs to build a new school to accommodate new people that cost is split among everyone not just the new people.  Then in 10 years when they need another school you pay for it again etc.  This results in developers being able to pawn off the majority of infrastructure costs.<p>Currently, areas often use zoning to try and limit growth, but that just means whoever get&#x27;s to build new property get&#x27;s to pocket the difference which opens the way to graft etc.   IMO, the reasonable solution to that problem is simply to tax people who build new property a share of the existing infrastructure costs.  (Note: Bonds seem like a way to side step this, but your still splitting the costs with everyone not just immigrants.)<p>Of course there is also NIMBY issues where people don&#x27;t want change.  But, that&#x27;s a separate issue.