Contact
Becoming the more-jobs state
Michael Swickard
Two things are true for the majority of high-school students in New Mexico, especially in the smaller communities: First, if these young people get college degrees, they tend to make considerably more money in their lifetime than if they do not. It is not a guarantee, but, like fastening your seat belt, while it does not completely protect you in a collision, it certainly improves your odds of not being seriously injured. Additionally, when young people get college degrees they generally will have many more opportunities than without.
Secondly, for many who get college degrees there is a better-than-average chance they will have to relocate elsewhere in the state or, more likely, somewhere else in the nation to be able to have a college-education-required job.
College-required jobs are at a premium in New Mexico, outside of finance, engineering, nursing and education. New Mexico colleges graduate many students who find that pressures in the job market force them to leave the state. There are even majors in New Mexico colleges for which there are no jobs within the state. In talking to recent graduates I find that some ambitious graduates say it is obvious that companies in New Mexico are just holding on, not leading the nation.
There are four stakeholders in this discussion: first, the New Mexico taxpayers, since they provide quite a bit of the money it takes to run the colleges in New Mexico. Tuition is often less than half of the true cost of the education and that tab is picked up by the New Mexico taxpayers. What do those taxpayers want? More college-educated citizens living in New Mexico.
A second stakeholder is the business community, which understands that to expand it must attract good businesses to New Mexico. Chicken and egg as to which must be first, but both well-educated citizens and college-degree-requiring companies must together improve the business environment.
Third, there are the parents of college graduates. Nothing is more heartbreaking for parents than children moving out of state. Parents work hard getting their children in high school and college. They are crushed when their child gets seven job offers, not one from a company in New Mexico. Oh, my. These poor parents will now spend untold hours in airports to be able to see the grandchildren.
Finally, the fourth stakeholder is the students themselves. Most have gone into debt and need to get jobs that both challenge them and provide the kind of financial support they need to have in the next phase of their lives.
Being anti-business
So why are there so few commercial professional jobs locally? It would seem to me that the reason for fewer jobs is because the climate for commercial economic development locally is very anti-business. The definition of anti-business is doing those things that make it harder to be in business than is ought to be. Example: Everyone in business has to do paperwork. Anti-business is when you have to go round and round with a government agency about the paperwork that you have done correctly, but they ignore.
This unfriendly attitude toward business is not a new problem. It has been this way since the 1960s, and, unless something changes, it will be this way forever. Many leaders in New Mexico have never made a payroll and look down their noses at those people who own their own businesses. Many like the safe jobs working for the state where they get all holidays off and never have to work at night.
When I graduated from NMSU with my bachelor’s degree in 1972, I was forced to relocate even though I would have rather stayed in Las Cruces. Why did I leave? There were no professional jobs in town for my degree. Years later I was finally able to return by taking a considerable pay cut from my out-of-state job. I am glad to have returned and live in this state but it did require coming back to an anti-business world.
There awo reasons for the long-term lack of economic growth. For some people, New Mexico is perfect as is. They want to keep its quaint and charming ambiance. Lacking that, they want as little growth as possible. They resist providing any incentives to bring companies to our area.
The second group concerns me more. For them, the real conflict is that commercial growth is fueled by people making a profit. These people do not support commercial activity because they are anti-capitalism. Some of the second group even seem to be employed by the local, county and state governments. Their priority is making rules to limit economic growth.
Real economic growth comes from jobs. It is an immutable truth that the way to depress economic growth is to place barriers to economic development. The biggest barriers to economic growth are rules and regulations like impact fees for businesses and the zoning. Each rule slows growth and discourages new businesses.
I am a capitalist and proud of it. I went to college to make more money. We need to develop the commercial economic base in our area so our children can go to college and then stay in the area. One way to start is with our local government. Identify those people who think that making money is bad. They need to be fired.
Swickard is co-host of the radio talk show News New Mexico, which airs from 6 to 9 a.m. Monday through Friday on a number of New Mexico radio stations and through streaming. His e-mail address is michael@swickard.com.
8 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Students are the most important stakeholders. They need good educations to find good jobs. If the quality of the education and the institution’s reputation continue to suffer, they will go elsewhere and/or employers will look for better educated students from other institutions.
The quality of education and tuition costs shouldn’t be understated. Tuition costs at UNM have increased 75% from $1656 in 2003 to $2905 in 2011. UNM students do not have a favorable rating of the institution compared to other NM colleges and universities. The administration, under Schmidley and Harris, has been riddened with controversy over the last 10 years. Both received faculty votes of no confidence about two years ago; questions abound about salaries and raises for Harris and 20+ other VP’s; political cronies placed in high-paying jobs at UNM, etc. Yet, except for Schmidley, who will be out soon, Harris and most others remain.
And you missed another important stakeholder group: the faculty. They are the true educators and hold much of the responsibility for the quality of students education. They need more recognition and participation in the educational process, and in promoting the viability of students to employers in the state.
Yes I read the column, and you mumble about regulations and “anti-growth” policies, yet plenty of places with higher incomes than NM are considered highly regulated, and places full of conservatives who ought to be totally laissez faire are full of poor people. Attributing NM’s problems to a couple rules that are not even implemented yet is nonsense. How do impact fees that just took effect in January account for anything that has happened in NM in the past 50 years? Please. Your column never makes any sense, you make clains without any basis in facts.
If anything in NM is holding it back, it’s the gross receipts tax, whereas other states have sales taxes, NM also taxes services. Look into it.
Did anyone who responded even read the column? I never mentioned either political party and what I wrote about was college degree required jobs being important to New Mexico.
Qofdisks – write: President Obama’s new tax plan cut corporate tax rates. The tax rate will be reduced from 35% to 28%. It looks like you and your friends will be voting for President Obama to have a second term Mr. Swickard.”
qofdisks, did you even read the column?
master_debater wrote: “Wait, they’re not anti-business, just anti-education, much like the Republican party.”
master_debater, did you even read the column?
qofdisks wrote “Even if there are “more jobs” if they are at below 16.00 an hour net, workers will not have money beyond subsistence. A subsistence wage creates a subsistence economy like Chinese manufacturing communities/rabbit warrens.”
qofdisks, did you even read the column? It was about college degree required jobs.
OakTrucheon wrote: “…but he’s still beating his wife over how this should accomplished.”
OakTrucheon, did you even read the column? It was about college degree required jobs.
Otis wrote: “When we start giving tax breaks and exclusions for “capitalist” companies to come to the state we are just engaging in more socialism.”
Otis, did you even read the column?
President Obama’s new tax plan cut corporate tax rates. The tax rate will be reduced from 35% to 28%. It looks like you and your friends will be voting for President Obama to have a second term Mr. Swickard.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/business/economy/obama-introduces-plan-to-cut-corporate-tax-rate.html?_r=1
“ Mr. Obama proposed to end tax breaks for companies that move jobs overseas and to create new breaks for those that bring jobs back”
Yeah, anti-business… we all know how liberal and anti-business these states are:
Louisiana, South Carolina, Montana, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Alabama, Kentucky, Arkansas, West Virginia and Mississippi
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_income
Wait, they’re not anti-business, just anti-education, much like the Republican party.
The most pro-business state is when workers are paid above subsistence wages so they have money to spend. More supply side economics will do nothing to negate that fact. What good is it for businesses to produce more with fewer people when no one can afford to buy their services and products?
Even if there are “more jobs” if they are at below 16.00 an hour net, workers will not have money beyond subsistence. A subsistence wage creates a subsistence economy like Chinese manufacturing communities/rabbit warrens.
If Republicans do not want society to depend on government, then businesses have to step in. Business does not do that, nor is it the function of private business to do that. It is not even the function of business to provide jobs.
I don’t think anyone disagrees with Michael on the basic idea, but he’s still beating his wife over how this should accomplished.
“Incentives”. Ah, yes. The conservative’s term for big government give-aways. Let’s offer “incentives” to large corporations in the way of tax breaks, environmental law passes, labor law exclusions, etc. Funny how when those bad, bad libs want to shovel taxpayer money to a cause it’s immoral. When the conservatives want to do the exact same thing except to a different group it’s a job-creating program. Hogwash. If a company can’t compete and make a profit in this state then they are just not successful in the capitalist system. When we start giving tax breaks and exclusions for “capitalist” companies to come to the state we are just engaging in more socialism.