Why is New Mexico so stagnant?

[Ragnaroni]

The Southwest is growing a lot but NM has not grown much by comparison to its neighbors. All of the states in the region have gained EV within the past 20 years while NM last got an increase in the 1980 census.

What's the deal here? Just not a nice place to live in or something? Breaking Bad isn't making the state gain people...

[It’s so Joever]

Because it doesn’t have a booming tech industry like Colorado, Utah, and Idaho.

I do think NM could be a prime candidate though for such an industry and honestly really should incentivize R&D companies to move into the area, especially given the presence of Los Alamos already so it isn’t a stretch of imagination.

NM is a case where reduced regulation and more pro-business policies actually really could be helpful imo.

[Ragnaroni]

From 1970 up to the Great Recession, New Mexico had a population that was growing faster than the nation as a whole, but since then, foreign immigration into the state has slowed down drastically (to the point that it, in 2021, received less immigration on a per capita basis than South Dakota).

To top it off, net domestic migration turned strongly negative due to many factors, particularly a poor economy. New Mexico also has recently entered a state of natural decline as more deaths have been recorded in the state than births.

Interesting, they need to get some special industry there. The previous poster posted something about tech and I think New Mexico could benefit from that (and Walther White)!

[It’s so Joever]

From 1970 up to the Great Recession, New Mexico had a population that was growing faster than the nation as a whole, but since then, foreign immigration into the state has slowed down drastically (to the point that it, in 2021, received less immigration on a per capita basis than South Dakota).

To top it off, net domestic migration turned strongly negative due to many factors, particularly a poor economy. New Mexico also has recently entered a state of natural decline as more deaths have been recorded in the state than births.

Interesting, they need to get some special industry there. The previous poster posted something about tech and I think New Mexico could benefit from that (and Walther White)!

Honestly, a breaking bad themed amusement park could be cool.

[Damocles]

Because it's an inland state, is relatively far from larger and more developed markets in either LA/PHX and Eastern Texas, has few natural resources, doesn't have much to offer in terms agricultural output, and is being cannibalized for its young and educated workforce by other, higher-paying markets with better opportunities.

[Roll Roons]

The root question of this is why Albuquerque has never been considered a "hot" city in the way that Phoenix, Denver, SLC, Boise, Dallas, Houston and Austin are.

[kwabbit]

There are plenty of answers that explain the low growth in the 2010s, but what always stuck out to me was the shift from quite high growth in the 90s and 2000s to basically none in the 2010s. It's not like ABQ has been dead for 50 years, this a pretty new change.

[100% pro-life no matter what]

It's probably worth saying that it's not as warm in the winter in Albuquerque as it is in Phoenix or the major Texas cities.  A portion of migration to the Sunbelt is about taxes or cost of living, but it also has to do with people wanting to escape winter.

[Cokeland Saxton]

High poverty, lack of industry, generally rural, aging population, the list goes on

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

In trying to think of what distinguishes NM from AZ one thing I wonder about is water availability? NM's major cities are all along the Rio Grande, but NM doesn't have large reservoirs on the level of Meade or Powell. I also have to imagine that there's more flow moving along the AZ/CA border than there is along the Rio Grande in NM. So, there's more of a basis for farming and potable water for developing larger metro areas.

I'll also add that eastern NM has a lot of drilling presence but probably is a lot less attractive prospect for development in that industry there relative to neighboring Texas (where Midland/Odessa is larger than anything comparable in the Permian Basin). I'd wager that Texas is friendlier for any kind of development than Eastern New Mexico.

Because it doesn’t have a booming tech industry like Colorado, Utah, and Idaho.

I do think NM could be a prime candidate though for such an industry and honestly really should incentivize R&D companies to move into the area, especially given the presence of Los Alamos already so it isn’t a stretch of imagination.

NM is a case where reduced regulation and more pro-business policies actually really could be helpful imo.

Funnily enough, Microsoft was founded in ABQ (and re-located to Bellevue within a decade) and Jeff Bezos supposedly considered the city as a launching ground for Amazon. Sadly for the city once the tech presence established in Seattle it had a prime-mover advantage that made it hard for other cities (like ABQ) to get a foothold.

[Libertas Vel Mors]

Because it doesn’t have a booming tech industry like Colorado, Utah, and Idaho.

I do think NM could be a prime candidate though for such an industry and honestly really should incentivize R&D companies to move into the area, especially given the presence of Los Alamos already so it isn’t a stretch of imagination.

NM is a case where reduced regulation and more pro-business policies actually really could be helpful imo.

Nevada, Arizona, Texas, and Montana don't have big tech industries either (excluding Austin), but they're all growing quickly despite that.

You are correct that regulations and economic policy play a large role in New Mexico's growth problem. New Mexico has higher tax rates and a bigger state government than surrounding states: its most recent budget spent $4500 per person, versus just $2200 per person in Arizona (obviously, not the full story: this # doesn't account for regulatory environments, specific tax rates, etc, but a good indicator).

Explanations that rely on NM not having any "hot" cities not seem very fitting. First, focusing on "hot cities" ignores why those cities are hot in the first place: cities do not become hot randomly, but usually as a function of other decisions or policies. Salt Lake City is "hot" because it is a good place to do business: Albuquerque is not because it is not.

Focusing on temperature also seems misguided. None of Boise, Salt Lake City, Denver, or the Rocky states more generally are particularly known for their warmth, yet Idaho grew by 17% and Montana by 10% between 2010 and 2020.

[Skill and Chance]

It's probably worth saying that it's not as warm in the winter in Albuquerque as it is in Phoenix or the major Texas cities.  A portion of migration to the Sunbelt is about taxes or cost of living, but it also has to do with people wanting to escape winter.

Yes, but Denver and Boise are both booming and they snow more, so that doesn't really fit for a Mountain West comparison.

[Skill and Chance]

I do think NM is a case of the local government being the problem.  So much corruption and parochialism for so long takes its toll, and they haven't cut taxes in recent times while every other state around them has.  The other clearest case of this is LA.  New Orleans logically should have grown into a megacity the size of Houston or Miami.

On the other hand, TN seems to be a clear case of the local government doing something right.  Economically, they are in far better shape than anyone around them that doesn't have a distant megacity to fall back on.       

[Torie]

It's not warm in the winter like the Valley of the Sun in AZ, and its major city is something of a dump. Santa Fe is chic, but expensive and somewhat exotic, with a high elevation, so again not geezer friendly. It is good for artists and counter culture types that are fit who can bring their money with them. It's also light on ski resorts. Much of it is just far too much like west TX, that nobody sane would ever want to live in, unless to predate the oil patch ala GHWB.

[Хahar 🤔]

In trying to think of what distinguishes NM from AZ one thing I wonder about is water availability? NM's major cities are all along the Rio Grande, but NM doesn't have large reservoirs on the level of Meade or Powell. I also have to imagine that there's more flow moving along the AZ/CA border than there is along the Rio Grande in NM. So, there's more of a basis for farming and potable water for developing larger metro areas.

When I asked this question a few years ago, this was the answer I got. The other ideas offered in this thread are either tautological or simply don't make any sense. In the West the obvious thing to look at is always water, and New Mexico doesn't have the water supply to sustain a population like that of Arizona.

[Хahar 🤔]

In trying to think of what distinguishes NM from AZ one thing I wonder about is water availability? NM's major cities are all along the Rio Grande, but NM doesn't have large reservoirs on the level of Meade or Powell. I also have to imagine that there's more flow moving along the AZ/CA border than there is along the Rio Grande in NM. So, there's more of a basis for farming and potable water for developing larger metro areas.

When I asked this question a few years ago, this was the answer I got. The other ideas offered in this thread are either tautological or simply don't make any sense. In the West the obvious thing to look at is always water, and New Mexico doesn't have the water supply to sustain a population like that of Arizona.

Neither does Nevada, for that matter, but they've been able to adapt and evolve. Large portions of the world have a worse water supply than New Mexico but sustain large human populations.

The two population centers in Nevada are directly adjacent to Lake Tahoe and Lake Mead. Lake Mead, which supplies water for Las Vegas, holds 28.23 million acre-feet of water. The largest reservoir in New Mexico, Elephant Butte Reservoir (which is not even near the city's main metropolitan area), holds 2.07 million acre-feet of water, barely 7% of Lake Mead's capacity. I'm not sure what sort of "adapting and evolving" would solve that problem, but it provides a powerful disincentive to growth that directly explains why New Mexico has not grown in the way that neighboring states with more reliable water supply have.

On a related note, it seems like nearly every answer given in this thread also applies to many other states.

Doesn't have a booming tech industry applies to Oklahoma and Arkansas, two states which are seeing fast growth. Is not warm enough applies to South Dakota, which is seeing fast growth, its inland status applies to many other states as well etc. etc. etc.

You forgot to mention lack of water storage capacity, which does not similarly apply to any states that are growing quickly. Funny, isn't it?

[Хahar 🤔]

Supposedly, though, Nevada and specifically Las Vegas is one of the most water-efficient places on the planet. Everything is optimized for minimum water usage there, and I imagine a similar thing could happen in New Mexico.

Perhaps it could, but in Nevada there are very specific reasons that things are the way they are: specifically, the gambling industry and associated tourism, which together have driven all the growth in southern Nevada. If not for gambling, southern Nevada would look like southern Utah and Las Vegas might be the size of St. George. Nevada is the outlier here, not New Mexico. Maybe New Mexico would be different if it had legalized casino gambling, but 48 other states haven't done that, either.

[ملكة كرينجيتوك]

NM doesn't seem like the kind of state that'd be climatically or economically hospitable to mass domestic migration, and such a phenomenon would probably destroy a lot of its tourism appeal. Aside from rugged topography, SoCal's population growth is limited by poor zoning laws (resulting in car-centric development) and chronic water shortages.

Nevada and Arizona are demographic outliers in the Mountain West, not the norm. The Western US was settled during an unusually wet 100 years or so. Climate change is only going to make the "return to climatic normal" worse.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

Supposedly, though, Nevada and specifically Las Vegas is one of the most water-efficient places on the planet. Everything is optimized for minimum water usage there, and I imagine a similar thing could happen in New Mexico.

Perhaps it could, but in Nevada there are very specific reasons that things are the way they are: specifically, the gambling industry and associated tourism, which together have driven all the growth in southern Nevada. If not for gambling, southern Nevada would look like southern Utah and Las Vegas might be the size of St. George. Nevada is the outlier here, not New Mexico. Maybe New Mexico would be different if it had legalized casino gambling, but 48 other states haven't done that, either.

Nevada was pretty lightly populated for decades until about 60-70 years ago.

[jimrtex]

The root question of this is why Albuquerque has never been considered a "hot" city in the way that Phoenix, Denver, SLC, Boise, Dallas, Houston and Austin are.

Albuquerque is too high to be an attractive retirement destination, and also has colder winters than Phoenix and Tucson. Too southerly to have good skiing like in Denver or Salt Lake. Relatively poor. Los Alamos and Sandia apparently too insular to form high-tech base. Oil & Gas exploration is based out of Houston and Midland-Odessa.