Map Shows States With Best Work-Life Balance
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The industry you work in and your employer can make a huge difference when it comes to work-life balance. However, a new report from Solitaire Bliss indicates that the state you live in could also play a part.
The report analyzed the average time spent on a variety of leisure activities reported in the U.S. Census Bureau's latest American Time Use Survey and found that Missouri, Louisiana, and Connecticut were the three best states for work-life balance.
Why It Matters
In the years following the coronavirus pandemic, conversations around work-life balance have reignited, with remote work and flexibility becoming key offerings for employers to attract top talent.
While some employers feel it's vital to reduce turnover and attract top talent, others are more restrictive, preferring maximum time in the office.
What To Know
Missouri, Louisiana, Connecticut, Indiana and Massachusetts all ranked in the top five for states with the best work-life balance, with a leisure-to-work ratio of 1.3 or more.
Closely following in the top 10 were Kentucky, Michigan, North Carolina, Oklahoma and Illinois.
Meanwhile, Utah, Kansas, and Iowa are the three worst states for work-life balance.
"You'd expect Utah to be near the top given its strong outdoor lifestyle and recreational appeal," Kevin Thompson, the CEO of 9i Capital Group and the host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek. "To see it ranked as the worst state is a bit of an anomaly. That said, Utah's cost of living is higher than the national average, which could be a contributing factor."
Other trends emerged in the data, according to Solitaire Bliss.
"Some states ranked higher in work-life balance due to outside factors such as shorter commute times, job flexibility, and access to leisure-friendly environments such as nature," Solitaire Bliss CEO Neal Taparia told Newsweek. "This is especially seen with states such as California, where people spend the most time playing sports and in spiritual activities."
While California and Pennsylvania residents spent the most leisure time on religious and spiritual activities, people in Nebraska and Missouri spent the most leisure time socializing and relaxing.
California and Oklahoma residents were heavy on sports and exercise, while Iowa and Michigan saw high rates of leisure time spent traveling.
File photo of a child painting while his mother works in the background.
File photo of a child painting while his mother works in the background.What People Are Saying
Solitaire Bliss CEO Neal Taparia told Newsweek: "The findings suggest that an even balance of work-life activities is closely tied to overall well-being, mental health, and productivity. States that support more leisure time often have healthier, more satisfied residents, and the residents are far less likely to experience burnout."
Alex Beene, a financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "It may surprise some to see Missouri, Louisiana and Indiana beating out states more renowned for their outdoor-heavy activities like Utah and Colorado when it comes to a better work-life balance. However, work-life balance isn't just about options; it's about accessibility.
"Some states have a better mixture of not just increased options for life outside of work, but they also benefit from shorter commute times, better job flexibility, and more affordable options for making activities with families or groups an easier possibility."
What Happens Next
Companies that prioritize work-life balance are likely to reap the benefits in the years to come, Taparia said.
"As more people recognize these benefits and as employees begin to speak out about the importance of having leisure time, employers could start offering more supportive practices, such as flexible hours or even four-day workweeks," Taparia said. "On the employer side, enacting these changes could improve morale in the workplace and retention rates."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
8 hours ago
- Newsweek
Dairy Queen Announces Major Menu Change Starting This Month
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Dairy Queen revealed its highly anticipated fall 2025 menu lineup, reintroducing the popular Pumpkin Pie Blizzard and debuting two desserts for customers nationwide. The new menu is set to launch across participating U.S. locations on August 29, for a limited time. Why It Matters Dairy Queen's seasonal menu updates have become a widely anticipated event, as the fast-food industry heightens its focus on limited-time flavors that help drive customer visits as seasons change. With ongoing competition from major brands like Krispy Kreme and Starbucks, which have both already announced pumpkin-inspired fall offerings, Dairy Queen aims to capture early fall attention and reinforce customer loyalty. Patrons are shown at a Dairy Queen restaurant amid the coronavirus pandemic, on May 25, 2020, in Williams, Arizona. Patrons are shown at a Dairy Queen restaurant amid the coronavirus pandemic, on May 25, 2020, in Williams, To Know The return of the Pumpkin Pie Blizzard, a dessert introduced in 1991, underscores the nostalgic appeal that has become a staple of fast-food seasonal menus. It has been consistently popular among Dairy Queen customers. The seasonal offering combines soft serve with pieces of real pumpkin pie and is finished with whipped cream and a sprinkle of nutmeg. Despite past years including other notable Blizzards, like the Oreo Fudge Brownie and Reese's Peanut Butter Cup Pie, the 2025 fall menu focuses on the Pumpkin Pie Blizzard as its main returning feature. Dairy Queen Reveals Two New Desserts Dairy Queen's 2025 Fall Treat Collection also features two brand-new items: Caramel Toffee Cookie Blizzard: This treat combines Dairy Queen's traditional soft serve with chewy cookie pieces, rich caramel and toffee. This treat combines Dairy Queen's traditional soft serve with chewy cookie pieces, rich caramel and toffee. Maple Cookie Shake: The shake features a maple cookie crumble base blended with soft serve and real milk, topped with whipped cream for a seasonal finish. The fall desserts will also be released nationwide at participating Dairy Queen locations on August 29. The company said these flavors will only be available for a limited time and encourage customers to visit stores before supplies run out. Current summer classics, including the Dipped Strawberry Cheesecake Blizzard and S'mores Blizzard, remain available for those not ready to welcome fall just yet. Newsweek reached out to Dairy Queen for comment via email. What People Are Saying Kevin Thompson, CEO of 9i Capital Group and host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek: "The fast-food industry continues to face rising costs, especially for staples like meat and chicken. To offset this, chains are leaning into higher-margin products. Ice cream and dessert items, like Dairy Queen's Blizzards, offer better profitability while also tapping into nostalgia. By bringing back fan favorites, Dairy Queen isn't just appealing to sentiment. It's strategically boosting margins in a challenging cost environment." Alex Beene, financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "There's more to this strategy than Dairy Queen cashing in on the pumpkin craze so many other retailers do as the fall months approach. Dairy Queen, like other fast food restaurants, are pushing new menu items in an attempt to win back customers who have stopped eating out as much to save money. The hope is these new items can generate a buzz, increase foot traffic, and ultimately produce more sales." What Happens Next Dairy Queen's 2025 Fall Treat Collection officially rolls out August 29 at participating locations nationwide, remaining on menus for a limited time while supplies last.
Newsweek
9 hours ago
- Newsweek
Trump Scores Two Big Wins in One as NATO Buys US Arms for Ukraine
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A string of NATO state pledges to acquire mostly U.S. weapons to provide to Ukraine has marked a victory for President Donald Trump in his effort to strike a balance on shifting the burden of Washington's role in the war to European allies while maintaining a role in the conflict. The developments take place as Trump has hardened his rhetoric against Russian President Vladimir Putin, offering him until Friday to demonstrate progress on stalled peace talks. "This initiative strikes the correct balance between ensuring Ukraine has the weapons needed to continue to resist Russian aggression and buying time for President Trump's diplomacy and economic pressure to take hold," Alexander Gray, a senior fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council who served on the staff of the National Security Council under the first Trump administration, told Newsweek. Gray also pointed out the broader geopolitical stakes that the Trump administration had in mind, including "the very real need of the United States to empower Europe to take the lead in its backyard while U.S. attention adjusts to the existential threat of China in the Indo-Pacific." U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at a press conference during the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit in The Hague on June 25, 2025. U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at a press conference during the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit in The Hague on June 25, 2025. JOHN THYS/AFP/Getty Images Money and Munitions on the Move The Netherlands was the first to announce on Monday that it would deliver an estimated $580 million package of U.S. weapons, including Patriot air defense systems and artillery equipment, to Ukraine. NATO reported the following day that Denmark, Norway and Sweden had confirmed they would purchase $500 million worth of U.S.-sourced equipment. Both moves mark the first two tranches under the NATO-led Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) initiative. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce welcomed the back-to-back moves as critical for Ukraine, as well as for the Trump administration's broader outlook on recalibrating the transatlantic security partnerships in a way that was more beneficial to the U.S. "These commitments deliver on President Trump's initiative to facilitate billions of dollars in investment to the United States defense industry and create American jobs while ensuring Europe can ultimately defend itself long term," Bruce told reporters on Tuesday. They also come on the heels of a trade deal reached late last month between the U.S. and the European Union, through which Trump said EU member states—the majority of whom are also in NATO—agreed to purchase "hundreds of billions of dollars-worth of military equipment" from the U.S. Last week, EU Ambassador to the U.S. Jovita Neliupšienė spoke to the importance of the military component of the trade agreement, both in the context of the war in Ukraine and EU member states' own security, in an interview with Newsweek. "Because of the Russian aggression in Ukraine, and because for European countries, security is really an existential topic right now," Neliupšienė told Newsweek at the time, "I think cooperation on the strategic level, but as well on defense procurement with the U.S., is extremely important." A Patriot air defense system is seen installed at the military hub for Ukraine at the Rzeszow-Jasionka airport in Jasionka, south-east Poland, on March 6, 2025. A Patriot air defense system is seen installed at the military hub for Ukraine at the Rzeszow-Jasionka airport in Jasionka, south-east Poland, on March 6, 2025. SERGEI GAPON/AFP/Getty Images A Transatlantic Shift Neliupšienė also discussed how European allies of the U.S. were looking to double down on investments in their own defense industrial base in order "to make sure we have more strategic independence, we have diversification, and we are really increasing the production and real defense industry on the ground, to have a possibility to not only to defend ourselves, but to deter." EU and NATO leaders, including French President Emmanuel Macron, have long sounded the alarm on the necessity for Europe to improve on defense. Such calls have accelerated this year since the reelection of Trump, who has repeatedly accused European leaders of taking advantage of U.S. security guarantees. The EU took an unprecedented step on this front in March, announcing that member states would spend some $685 billion—on top of more than $170 billion in EU loans—to launch a large-scale rearmament plan. With the tides of transatlantic security changing, Gray argued that the Trump administration should "continue to encourage Europe to invest in its own defense, including by purchasing U.S. systems like Patriot and others that strengthen our defense industrial base and further integrate our militaries." "This also has very real domestic benefits for the United States," he added. "President Trump is likely to continue encouraging significant arms sales from our partners globally, as he did in his first term for strategic and economic reasons, including to balance our trade deficits." A Ukrainian soldier stands on a U.S. Bradley Fighting Vehicle, on January 15, 2025, in Sumy, Ukraine. A Ukrainian soldier stands on a U.S. Bradley Fighting Vehicle, on January 15, 2025, in Sumy, Off of Washington While the rush of U.S. arms may serve to meet some of Ukraine's shortfalls on the battlefield, some argue the tranches also run the risk of deepening rather than countering European dependence on the U.S. in the long run. "Arms sales are an unfortunate Catch 22 situation, both for European policymakers and for American advocates of greater burden-shifting to Europe," Emma Ashford, senior fellow at the Stimson Center's Reimagining US Grand Strategy program, told Newsweek. "In the short run, purchasing U.S. arms may be good for the American economy— and also may enable European states to step up their military capabilities more quickly," Ashford said. "But in the long run, these purchases from the United States also undermine the development of a robust European defense industrial base." At the same time, she argued that "European allies buying American weapons to send to Ukraine is more sustainable from the point of view of U.S. public opinion, in that it reduces the concerns over cost among the public and policymakers." "It also means that Congress does not need to take up another supplemental spending bill, which could be politically problematic for many members," Ashford said, "and that the Trump administration—which has publicly opposed such a bill—would not have to sign it." There's another challenge she points out, and that's a "concrete shortfall in some weapons systems needed for both the Indo-Pacific and Europe, and in a few cases, the Middle East." "Money does not resolve this concern, which particularly attaches to things like air defense systems," she said, "this was the source of the recent disagreement over the Pentagon's halt on weapons systems to Ukraine." A destroyed U.S.-made M1 Abrams tank is seen in footage released by the Russian military on April 8, 2025. A destroyed U.S.-made M1 Abrams tank is seen in footage released by the Russian military on April 8, 2025. Russian Defense Ministry Press Service Press Service/AP 'Europeans Need to Do More' With the dust still settling from the U.S.-EU trade deal, some analysts in Europe see the recent NATO arrangement as a step forward, though not without uncertainty. "From a U.S. political perspective, it is understandable that President Trump— frustrated by his failed efforts to broker a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine, and constrained by his MAGA base and campaign promises to end military aid— has been seeking an alternative solution to keep Ukraine armed," Juraj Macjin, policy analyst at the European Policy Center in Brussels, told Newsweek. "Despite repeatedly calling it 'Joe Biden's war,'" Macjin said, "Trump knows that the fall of Kyiv would mark a major strategic failure for any U.S. administration, including his own." He called the new NATO mechanism as "commendable," but argued it "does little to strengthen the quality of the transatlantic partnership" at a time when European skepticism toward Trump's long-term commitments on the continent remained high. "Many in Europe perceive this approach as a way for the United States to quietly distance itself from both the war in Ukraine and its European allies," Macjin said, "however diplomatically framed by NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte." "Furthemore, viewed in the context of the recently concluded EU–U.S. trade agreement," he added, "many in Europe feel that the deal offers limited benefits for the EU and is largely tilted in favor of Washington." And at a time when the U.S. was eyeing its rivalry with China in the Asia-Pacific, he said that "Europeans need to do more to persuade Trump that supporting Ukraine is in America's strategic interest." "With only a fraction of its GDP, the U.S. is significantly degrading military capabilities of one of its main adversaries—Russia—while also sending a clear message to China," he added, "which is closely watching how Washington manages its security commitments."
Newsweek
10 hours ago
- Newsweek
Gen Z Regrets Buying Homes at a Much Higher Clip Than Millennials: Survey
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Gen Z homeowners are regretting their home purchases at a far higher clip than their millennial counterparts, according to a new study. Nearly half, 42 percent, of Gen Z homeowners said they regretted their purchase in a 1,000-person survey conducted by home insurance company Kin. That was 27 percent higher than both millennials and Gen X. Why It Matters The American dream of homeownership faces a generational crisis as Gen Z buyers grapple with heightened regret and financial strain. A new wave of first-time buyers, facing record-high home prices and mortgage rates, reported historic rates of buyer's remorse, raising urgent questions about the affordability and accessibility of housing for future generations. A for sale sign is pictured in front of a home in Arlington, Virginia, on August 22, 2023. A for sale sign is pictured in front of a home in Arlington, Virginia, on August 22, 2023. ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS/AFP via Getty Images What To Know The generational divide in homeowner satisfaction has widened substantially, and many young buyers are feeling the regret. More than 40 percent of Gen Z homeowners regret purchasing their home, according to Kin Insurance's 2025 Generational Homeownership Survey, mainly due to the overwhelming cost of mortgages and unforeseen expenses. A much higher level of regret was reported by a survey from Open Door, which found that 94 percent of Gen Z and 86 percent of millennial first-time home sellers regretted buying a home and decided to part with it. Many underestimated expenses like maintenance and insurance, which were not always factored into initial budgets. "Purchasing a home is likely the largest financial decision in the average person's lifetime," nationwide title and escrow expert Alan Chang told Newsweek. "With this milestone, there are many factors to consider that some may not have fully contemplated in a sellers market." Housing costs have continued to rise, with home prices and mortgage rates near record highs. The median sale price hit $420,000 in late 2024, and 30-year fixed mortgage rates climbed back above 7 percent this year. Due to these heightened costs, a shift toward older first-time homebuyers is underway, with the median age now 38, up from 29 in the 1980s, according to the National Association of Realtors. The number of first-time buyers also fell to just 1.14 million in 2024, from 3.2 million in 2004. Of those who actually enter the housing market, many younger buyers are purchasing fixer-upper homes to save costs, often underestimating the time and money required for repairs. This approach has led to significant regret among new homeowners, especially those with limited resources. In the Kin Insurance survey, 39 percent of all homeowners said they spend at least one-third of their income on housing costs. And over half did not account for home insurance costs in their initial budgets, particularly in high-risk areas where insurance rates are well above the national average. "A lot of people look at the price of a home and think only about the mortgage payment. But it's never just the mortgage," Kevin Thompson, CEO of 9i Capital Group and host of the 9innings podcast, told Newsweek. "You have property taxes, PMI, HOA dues, and insurance, which seems to only go one way: up. Then there's the cost of actually living in the place, filling empty rooms with furniture, buying appliances like a washer and dryer, and covering all the other odds and ends that come with homeownership." What People Are Saying Thompson also told Newsweek: "Older generations faced higher interest rates, but they were paying those rates on far lower home values. The bigger picture here is that more people—especially younger buyers—may end up renting. And while rents can be just as high, if not higher, than a mortgage, renters avoid the headaches of property taxes, maintenance, and major repairs, although those costs are baked into the rent." Chang also told Newsweek: "Up until recently, the market favored sellers which meant that buyers were waiving contingencies and making quicker decisions in order to not miss out on a home with competing offers. In some instances, buyers skipped inspections or didn't fully consider the full cost of homeownership." Alex Beene, financial literacy instructor for the University of Tennessee at Martin, told Newsweek: "While it's difficult being "house poor" at any age, for Gen Z, it can create some real hurdles. Most in the generation who regret their home purchase cite mortgage costs as the leading reason, and it's easy to see why. Even if they were able to lock in a lower interest rate in prior years, they're still paying a high amount for the property itself, especially at a time in their lives when most Americans would rather be allocating those funds to other items or experiences." What Happens Next Housing affordability is not expected to improve significantly for young buyers in the near term. Persistently high mortgage rates, limited inventory and stagnant wages continue to discourage Gen Z and millennials from entering or upgrading in the market. Real estate professionals recommend young Americans begin financial planning early, seek available grants and programs for first-time buyers and carefully consider whether buying, renting or co-living is the best option for their circumstances. "The long-term risk is fewer individual homeowners, more corporate-owned housing, and a rental-heavy market unless the government steps in to slow that trend," Thompson said.
