America’s Happiest and Most Miserable States
The recent Forbes report on the “happiest states” had Hew Mexico ranked right in the middle at #25. The report contained one data point that may indicate a reason that change does not come easy – “On a scale of one to 10, residents ranked their life a 7.1. This score was higher than all other states.”
I probably should not have been surprised, but I was and it “answers” a lot. If life is good, why change???
25. New Mexico
> Well-being index score: 66.7
> Life expectancy: 78.2 years (20th lowest)
> Obesity: 24.6% (12th lowest)
> Median household income: $41,963 (8th lowest)
> Adult population with high school diploma or higher: 83.2% (7th lowest)
New Mexico ranked eighth-highest among all states in terms of life evaluation. On a scale of one to 10, residents ranked their life a 7.1. This score was higher than all other states. The state also ranked eighth-highest in terms of healthy behaviors. For instance, 82.1% of New Mexico residents indicated that they do not smoke, the sixth-highest percentage of all states. Furthermore, 56.7% of residents in New Mexico indicated that they exercised for at least 30 minutes in three of the last seven days, the ninth-highest percentage of all states. However, New Mexico scored badly in terms of work environment, ranking seventh from the bottom. Just 54.3% of people indicated their supervisor treated them more like a partner than a boss, less than the 56.5% across the country indicated the same thing.
One wonders what the impact of religious beliefs and practices have on these surveys re well being, or happiness. NM is a unusual for the number of practicing catholics…IIRC.
Was thinking that all the sunshine and the altitude in NM might also affect some aspect of happiness. Tibetan monks being among some of the silliest people I’ve ever met. And daily sunshine being something that at minimum, isn’t particularly depressing.
AZ state of state perhaps of interest because they are also sunny, and warmer…but not as Hispanic, and not as RC. What is it about employer/ employee relations reports…AZ and NM very very different for that one.
23. Arizona
> Well-being index score: 67.1
> Life expectancy: 79.9 years (9th highest)
> Obesity: 24.1% (7th lowest)
> Median household income: $46,709 (21st lowest)
> Adult population with high school diploma or higher: 85.7% (17th lowest)
In most of the well-being categories, Arizona didn’t rank anywhere near the top, nor did it rank particularly close to the bottom. The only category in which the state performed well was work environment, where it ranked ninth. Nearly 59% of workers indicated that their supervisor treated them more like a partner than a boss, the eighth-highest percentage of all states.
Although the state ranked below-average in terms of physical health, the obesity rate — one of the most important health indicators because of its strong link to other ailments — is lower than most states. Slightly more than 24% of residents were considered obese, the seventh-highest percentage of all states. Life expectancy is Arizona is nearly 80 years, among the highest rates in the country.
I’m redoing my comment here…NM is a state with it’s own unique history, and to understand today, one probably should refer to that history somewhat. Again, I’m not the expert, and maybe distorting or getting something completely wrong, FBOW, here’s my quick summary.
While clearly the ethnography of NM scores high on “hispanic” membership, those are not a monolith of common history, attributes, and culture. For centuries, the “hispanics” in NM were fairly isolated in the northern areas of the state, and were as influenced by the Pueblo Indians as much as Mexico or Spain. In addition, there was a fair amount of intermarriage.
Then, when western Europeans finally showed up in the 19th century, it was trade, but mostly mining that brought them here, and distributed them in boom towns around the whole state. Which then, for the most part became ghost towns by the early 20th century. The outlaw and mining boom lasted about 30 years at most.
There was ranching…but not very much of it. Some Native Americans like the Apache were around in the southern areas around Gila Forest. But the land didn’t support large populations in most areas. Later when the Rio Grande was damned there was more farming, and the southern part of the state developed populations along the river valleys. But not a lot of people.
Populations here, legally, and illegally, grew after WW2, but especially in the later part of the 20th century and first decade of 21st. This group included a much higher percentage of western european americans…but also a large number of Mexican immigrants, whose culture is quite different from the centuries old NM hispanics.
For this state, and perhaps others, drawing a line around everyone here, and coming to conclusions about the population as a whole, is likely an incomplete view at best.
When it comes to the needs of education for NM populace, there are a number of useful studies that tell us actionable data points…some of which may well have been posted to Best Links Ever in mid 2012 after Kris and I attended a Hispanic Ed Initiative meeting where researchers from UNM presented their latest reports.
That was a stunner about conditions that should NOT exist in the US, but do.
I certainly agree about the risks of the “broad brush” characterization of a populace, but there is more to it than a mixing of the history you recapped.
A couple of quibble or questions:
Aren’t Spanish (and Portuguese) Western Europeans?
Is there a material difference (for this discussion) between Pueblo and various Mexico-native Indians? All Native Americans, no?
I thought there was a pretty robust and ongoing exchange along the Jouranda del Muerte in the period preceding annexation by the US.
New Mexico’s separation from Mexico is so recent that I wonder how why the influence of the of the “old New Mexican” Hispanics and new Mexican arrivals would be that different.
I would really like to understand the stunning conditions you mention in the last line.