This argument, against redistribution from cities to rural areas of a country, seems to also apply against aid from rich countries to poor ones. In both cases, there are less-expensive, less-"developed" places where it is possible to have a family and raise children; richer, more-developed places where all the jobs are; and a flow of people from the former to the latter. These might be called "core" and "periphery".
The obvious solution would be to introduce a negative interest rate on cash so that rich city dwellers cannot accumulate massive trade surpluses against small towns which then means people don't have to move out of town to get a job.
It's quite tiring to see all these "faux" free market advocates or liberals, while they do absolutely nothing to actually get closer to the impossible ideal. They see the free as in free beer, i.e. reducing "government intervention" to let special interest groups get away with shady behavior instead of addressing known conflict sources and making control over them irrelevant.
