I think immigrant retirees to Florida are acting rationally, seeing a benefit in the free market of real estate and taxation regimes. I'm pointing out that this creates externalities and perverse incentives.
They find themselves in essentially the opposite position as what you describe. They are more organized and actually vote, despite being (presumably) vastly outnumbered by transplants in the Bay Area.
But, this is theoretically the process "working". Power goes to people who show up. So it doesn't really matter what people want if they don't bother to take part in the political process. (Or if they vote fair and square and are just not in the majority)
There are minority protections in our system. But, it's really tough to get them right. For example, rules that were supposed to protect the minority in the Bay Area are now being used to block any housing development or infrastructure projects.
But, I'm honestly interested to hear your thoughts. Why should we weigh living in a place for a long time heavier? Isn't the retirees voting down infrastructure serving the needs of the majority of residents (by keeping taxes low)?
Given that and many other similar scenarios (ex. gentrified city neighborhoods), the broader problem is that...
- Different groups of people have different interests (some want low taxes, some high. some want single family houses with nice back yards, others mixed use walkable urban utopias)
- Groups (mostly ones with more money) can swiftly move to a new area and disrupt the previous political power structure
It's definitely possible that the old residents can move to a new place. In fact, I think that this is the only real answer.
Anything else comes off as a violation of people's basic rights. You can't really expect to take people's votes away. You can't really prevent people from selling their property to who they want (except in an HOA scenario).
Actually, maybe that is a way out. More aggressive HOA communities that make sure residents have a shared vision for their town.
A Modest Proposal was humorously highlighting a real problem.
You could do that if you seceded. Otherwise it sounds kind of disenfranchising. We already have too much of that going on in the U.S. for other kinds of prejudice.