The problem with resettlement micromanagement isn't what people think it is

[Secret Master]

I think pops will decline on world's without jobs amenity and housing. But if it's normal world with healthy stability it will not

Emigration cuts POP growth, but actual decline (POPs showing up in the decline window) doesn't happen until things are really bad. I think it's actually low stability, not necessarily just a housing/amenity problem.

For example, I was running a fanatic egalitarian empire last night. Most of my high population planets had housing and employment shortages. But since my stability was high on them (80 stability even with housing shortages), no POPs were in actual decline. I wasn't even getting full emigration hits on them.

Perhaps running byzantine bureaucracy coupled with shared burden made the overcrowded dystopian core worlds of my empire tolerable.

 

[Roddo]

I think this whole system was designed to give the player late-game challenges to tacke, other than intergalactic conflict.
I can confidently say this is not the best idea, for who wants the hurdle of moving pops and securing housing for random ppl when you can be scheming the downfall of a great intergalactic horror horde.

 

[Greenslade]

There should be an automatic way for planets with a lot of unemployed pops to distribute them to places with lots of spare jobs. Whatever that mechanism is, that's really what we're after. Probably bringing back some elements of the old system, or making "pop decline" from emigration directly feed into pop growth somewhere else.