You're absolutely right about everything you said, but for me the crux of it comes down to: > If I had to choose between more money and a less livable environm

You're absolutely right about everything you said, but for me the crux of it comes down to: > If I had to choose between more money and a less livable environment, or less money and a more livable environment I'd choose the later one. Some people might choose differently, and moreover, the less taxation there is, the more people are able to choose between the two at all. After all, you can freely give to charity what isn't taxed from you, should you choose to trade your money to better outcomes of those around you. I have never been to your fair city (though I always have wanted to!), but a 34% foreign-born rate is comparable to many large cities in the US, some in states with more egalitarian policies (California, New Jersey) and some in states with less egalitarian policies (Florida, Texas); so clearly that is not a big driver, at least in the US, of where immigrants choose to go. San Francisco, famously egalitarian in its local politics, is right in line with Hamburg at 34.1% foreign-born; yet it is full of people using hard drugs in public, leaving syringes and human waste behind.