You make a strong point. I would argue that alternatives do exist in the form of other cities, and certainly jobs and people are (sometimes) choosing to go to e

You make a strong point. I would argue that alternatives do exist in the form of other cities, and certainly jobs and people are (sometimes) choosing to go to e.g. Texas instead of California on the basis of cost. The fact that the current inhabitants have such control over new construction is something I was taking as fixed, but I wouldn't argue it's healthy. Finally, as a compromise between paying Nimbys and forcing them to pay, I would be interested in seeing a trial of a kind of mutual auction. For example, a group of residents and a group of developers secretly bid what the project is worth to them (positive or negative) and then the higher bid pays the other party the value of the lower bid. There is probably a name for this, and a theory that shows how to do it properly, but I'd be interested to see if some economic games could reach a better solution (in terms of regret-minimization, for example).