This "just right" kind of balance is sensible on its face, but in the real world it manifests as mediocrity, when hundreds of other destinations exist for those

This "just right" kind of balance is sensible on its face, but in the real world it manifests as mediocrity, when hundreds of other destinations exist for those most willing and able to relocate, inevitably leaving behind those who are equipped the least. Over time, everyone will self-select to the level their resources bear. Competition between jurisdictions is real. Suburbs capitalized on the proximity to a city without having to bear the costs of legacy infrastructure and social services. Today, towns in mid-tier regions fight over the same trickle-down scraps, offering enormous incentives that aren't likely to be recouped, in a desperate act to attract an income stream. They do this because others do it too, and no one wants to lose out for not having been persistent. Meanwhile, budgets for infrastructure and social services are tight everywhere, unless the relevant jurisdiction has an enormous wealth fund, typically from resource extraction. The functioning of cities are barely economically sustainable, in our economic system largely based around capital and competition. Is it any wonder why their leaders strive so hard to attract wealth and forces that further attract that wealth?