El Paso the next Phoenix (Fort Bliss, Horizon City: appointed, camping, quality of life)

[malamute]

Fort Bliss brings in good jobs with it --- money, Americans. It's always been the backbone of this town -- even back when there were factories and plants --- Levis, Mountain Pass canning, plastics. It brings in the retired military from all over -- who eat out, shop and spend their money here.

Without all that -- what does the future hold?

[lipbalm]

Originally Posted by malamute

Fort Bliss brings in good jobs with it --- money, Americans. It's always been the backbone of this town -- even back when there were factories and plants --- Levis, Mountain Pass canning, plastics. It brings in the retired military from all over -- who eat out, shop and spend their money here.

Without all that -- what does the future hold?

I just think the "good jobs" (i.e. civilians that work directly for Ft. Bliss) will be few and far between. I have a friend who works there and he makes a killing with all the O.T. right now (he cleared 75K last year) but that's the exception rather then the rule. The rest of the jobs you describe (service industry) I would hardly classify them as "good jobs". Look at S.A. where Toyota just built a multi-million dollar brand new assembly plant where all the large size pick-ups will be built, now those are really "good jobs".

I just think that's the type of companies you should target, granted the big problem for El Paso is the infrastructure and un-educated workforce.

[malamute]

Maybe I should have said jobs -- but good jobs in that someone wouldn't be required to speak a foreign language to have them. Kids in El Paso have had it pretty tough finding jobs because of discrimination against them if they speak English. Most jobs prefer to hire people from Juarez.

The building and construction are adding good paying jobs too and the cultural changes are good for El Paso -- bringing back some of the diversity that has been lost.

[lipbalm]

Originally Posted by malamute

Maybe I should have said jobs -- but good jobs in that someone wouldn't be required to speak a foreign language to have them. Kids in El Paso have had it pretty tough finding jobs because of discrimination against them if they speak English. Most jobs prefer to hire people from Juarez.

The building and construction are adding good paying jobs too and the cultural changes are good for El Paso -- bringing back some of the diversity that has been lost.

I think that for the really good jobs "English" is what is required. But for these jobs a college education is the key. Again it all boils down to what type of skills/education do you posses, and believe me with these type of jobs english is all you need, in fact if you cant speak and write in english you don't have a prayer.

[WildWestDude]

Is El Paso about to give some of its "spanish as a first language attitude"?
If so we can resemble Phoenix but never catch up, if and only if tha is the water issue is solved.

had to briefly add my .02 c worth

[Tex?Il?]

I'm fairly familiar with the Phoenix metro area, having family there. I have been through Albequerque and have come close to El Paso.

The main draws to Pheonix are the climate, dry/low humidity and VERY mild winters. Its kind of like the place that since L.A. is way too costly Phoenix has that sunshine and warmth that people are looker for.

Tucson is growing a lot certainly. Albequerque is getting north enough and high elevation enough where it can actually get kind of cold in the winter, so it might not be a place that midwesterners and northeasterners are looking for, in terms of climate. Austin and San Antonio (from what I know I have yet to go there) I know can get somwehat humid/muggy.

I teach weather and climate, and have a fascination with history.

El Paso used to be bigger than Phoenix.

I also believe a place that may have been economically stagnant, but still has some unique historical charm, etc. that gets good leadership and local government who gets good projects done/built can become competitive with another metro area at a LOWER COST OF LIVING, even if they done quite all the amenities and opportunities.

The same comparison might be drawn between Chicago and St. Louis. The more expensive Chicago becomes for both residents and businesses, and St. Louis work on crime control and urban beautification, etc. the more St. Louis will have the ability to draw some business/attractions from Chicago.

So its not entirely crazy thinking that El Paso could become more like Phoenix if things happen to fall in place.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by councilor j

I am just surprised that someone would actually think that El Paso could become the next Phoenix, if any city became the next Phoenix it would be Albuquerque,Tucson or Austin, but I doubt that would ever happen,not for another 30 to 40 years maybe.

Austin is already way ahead of Phoenix as far as cultural attractions/facilities go, even it the population is much less.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by irwin

As someone who lives in Phoenix right now and used to spend a lot of time in Philly, that claim sounds WAY off. Please post some data showing that Phoenix is denser than Philly.

Phoenix recently passed Philly in total population, but I SERIOUSLY doubt that the density of Phoenix is higher than Philly. Philly has a real downtown and people actually live in urban neighborhoods (Center City, etc). Phoenix doesn't have a downtown and EVERYONE lives in detached, single family homes.

The CITY of Philly is certainly more dense, but southwestern METRO areas are often more dense than those in the east.
Phoenix, and other southwestern metro areas seem to have urban borders that stop abruptly. There generally are no very large lots anywhere in the greater Phoenix area, because everyone is bound by city water coming from one canal, or other source.

40 miles from Chicago and probably Philly (although I haven't actually been there) people can build a house on a wooded 2-acre lot and punch a well right on the outskirts of some established small town.

This affects the density of the total metro area.

You don't see that so much in the southwest, the water table is way beyond what a well can reach and SW metro areas border on total uninhabited wilderness often times.

You can probably look up the data in wikipedia, or some other source. Another source in Demographia.

[Tex?Il?]

Originally Posted by irwin

WAY OFF man.

Here are the number from Wikipedia:

Density (Population/Sq. Mile)
Philly: 10,882.8
Phoenix: 3,077.6

Philly is more than 3X as dense. And that is over the entire city. If we could compare densities for the downtown area I am sure it would be even more striking.

As a comparison (from Wikipedia as well):
El Paso: 337.3
San Antonio: 2,808.5
Dallas: 3,534
Houston: 3,480
Boston: 11,543
Washington: 9,015
Los Angeles: 8,198
New York: 26,720

So, Texas has a serious density problem and El Paso is about the worst.

Again,

its the difference between city propers and entire metro area.
Eastern and midwestern cities have VERY low density suburbs/exurbs on the fringes.

And city limits for many western city propers include a lot of land WELL out in uninhabited desert. You think you've got Phoenix behind you as you drive north from the city, and all of the sudden you seen the sign saying "leaving Phoenix city limits."

[El Passeaux]

Originally Posted by Tex?Il?

The CITY of Philly is certainly more dense, but southwestern METRO areas are often more dense than those in the east.
Phoenix, and other southwestern metro areas seem to have urban borders that stop abruptly. There generally are no very large lots anywhere in the greater Phoenix area, because everyone is bound by city water coming from one canal, or other source.

40 miles from Chicago and probably Philly (although I haven't actually been there) people can build a house on a wooded 2-acre lot and punch a well right on the outskirts of some established small town.

This affects the density of the total metro area.

You don't see that so much in the southwest, the water table is way beyond what a well can reach and SW metro areas border on total uninhabited wilderness often times.

You can probably look up the data in wikipedia, or some other source. Another source in Demographia.

For Chicago, its suburbs for about 50-70 miles in each direction.