High inmigration, low native born states tend to be high in natural amenities (read: mountains) or recent boom states in the west - many of which may have capitalized on the exodus from California. Note that North and South Carolina, Georgia, and Tennessee have similar numbers.
Most interesting is the grouping towards the upper right: states with both above average number of those born in state and positive or near positive migration. Could this signal a return of the diaspora to states like Texas, Kentucky, Alabama, Utah, or even Wisconsin and Pennsylvania?
I should add that the New Geography blogger looked at net domestic migration rate and geographic immobility. The scatter plot is a little misleading, like my original post on the subject. A more robust comparison would look at out-migration rates and in-migration rates relative to geographic immobility. On the balance, the state may be losing people. But is that the result of waning in-migration or growing out-migration?
Most Rust Belt states suffer from decreasing rates of in-migration. The talent problem is a lack of brain gain, not brain drain. Furthermore, are natural amenities or low taxes the primary attraction benefiting states such as Colorado? I don't think I've seen a libertarian migration analysis that controls for variables such as climate. But that doesn't seem to stop small government advocates from making baseless claims and fueling brain drain hysteria.