Coloradans spend more time working than people in most states: Study
Qualtrics XM, a data tool for businesses, released a report in March analyzing what percentage of the past year people spent working. The study used data from the American Time Use Survey, conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, for all 50 states.
Data: Income levels in Colorado among highest in the US, according to report
A handful of states had fewer than 10 survey responses and were excluded from the main story, but were included in a separate list.
According to the report, people in these states spent the highest percentage of their past year working:
Utah: 25.17%
Mississippi: 23.89%
North Carolina: 23.51%
Alabama: 23.44%
Colorado: 22.95%
According to the report, Utahns work an average of eight hours and 29 minutes per day, and their time on the clock accounts for over a quarter of the year.
Utah and Mississippi were the only states where the average workday exceeded eight hours.
Colorado ranked at No. 5, with an average workday lasting seven hours and 44 minutes. After a year with 260 workdays, Coloradans work an average of 120,617 minutes.
Report: Colorado has one of the best economies in US despite shortfalls
In the report, Qualtrics XM noted several reasons why people in some states work more hours than others.
'In states like Colorado, where housing and general cost-of-living expenses are high, workers may need to work more to afford their lifestyles,' the report states.
Other contributing factors include low unemployment rates and a high demand for labor, low wages, industry influences and prevalence of part-time work.
The full list and more data can be found in the full Qualtrics XM report online.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
8 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Tariffs on Brazil could leave coffee drinkers with a headache
Getting a daily caffeine fix could become more expensive. President Donald Trump's plan to impose a 50% tariff on all imports from Brazil starting next month would drive up the price of coffee, whether it's served in cafes or brewed in the kitchen. Such a tariff would put more pressure on the coffee industry as prices have peaked globally this year. Droughts in Brazil and Vietnam, two of the biggest coffee exporters to the United States, have resulted in smaller harvests in recent seasons, driving up prices. Consumers are already paying more at the grocery store. At the end of May, the average price of 1 pound of ground roast coffee in the U.S. was $7.93, up from $5.99 at the same time last year, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Trump's pledge to place tariffs on imports from Brazil is partly in retaliation for what he considers a 'witch hunt' against his political ally, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is facing trial for attempting a coup. More than 99% of the coffee Americans consume is imported from South America, Africa and Asia. Last year, the United States imported 1.6 million metric tons of both unroasted and roasted coffee, according to the Agriculture Department. Brazil accounted last year for more than 8.1 million bags, each with 60 kilograms of coffee, that came into the United States. Any sudden shift would be a 'lose-lose situation,' said Guilherme Morya, a coffee analyst for Rabobank based in São Paulo. Brazilian suppliers, he said, are holding tight and waiting to see if any negotiations will save them from needing to find buyers in other countries. Should the new 50% tariffs take effect, 'we're going to see a reshape in the coffee flow in the world,' Morya said. 'Especially Brazil to other regions.' If wholesale costs -- what restaurant chains or grocery stores pay -- for coffee rise by 50%, that could translate to an increase of 25 cents a cup within three months, said Ryan Cummings, the chief of staff for the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. It would take about three months after the tariff goes into effect for consumers to see higher prices at stores, he said. Large coffee buyers, like Starbucks, source their coffee from all over the world, and often sign contracts months or years in advance for beans, somewhat insulating them from immediate price shocks. Still, some analysts said, there could be a scramble as some customers try to shift their supply chains to avoid the tariffs on coffee from Brazil. 'With Trump doing this Whac-a-Mole tariff strategy, it's going to cause you, as a coffee manufacturer, a lot of uncertainty,' Cummings said. But even changing suppliers comes with issues. Should manufacturers pivot more of their buying to Vietnam, another large coffee producer, they would be reliant on a smaller output. And in addition to a possible disruption in quantity, the quality of the coffee coming into the United States could change. Much of the coffee produced in Brazil is arabica, a higher quality than the more bitter robusta, mostly produced in Vietnam and the rest of Asia. Other suppliers would be unlikely to match Brazil's robust output, including Vietnam, which has seen a recent decline in its coffee production. The country would not be able, in the short- or medium term, 'to stem the flow,' said David Gantz, an economist at Rice University's Baker Institute for Public Policy. In Brazil, 'some of the exports will probably cease entirely,' Gantz added. 'Others will continue, but the consumer will end up paying a higher price.' Coffee must be grown under the right conditions. It grows best at higher altitudes, in places with tropical temperatures and heavy rainfall. In the United States and its territories, that's limited to Hawaii and Puerto Rico. The United States last year produced a small fraction of the coffee consumed by Americans -- 11,462 metric tons -- and nearly all of it in Hawaii. Hawaii's coffee is mostly a specialty product, and costs two or three times more than even high-quality imported beans. Labor costs are much higher in Hawaii, as are commodities like water and energy, so there is little chance the state can meaningfully produce more coffee for the American market, even if tariffs drive up the costs of its competitors. 'We can't grow enough coffee,' said Shawn Steiman, the owner of Coffea Consulting in Honolulu. 'The Hawaiian coffee market isn't tied to the global industry.' Some consumers -- especially those who view coffee not as a luxury but a daily necessity -- may just pay a higher price, while others may trade down to cheaper coffee products or to other caffeine products like tea or energy drinks. Consumers do notice when the price of coffee drinks rises. Starbucks recently began charging a flat fee of 80 cents if customers added one or more pumps of flavored syrups to their beverages. Starbucks played down the change, saying it was done simply to standardize pricing across its stores and on its app. 'They sure did raise prices,' said Brandon Taylor, a video producer in Orlando, Florida, who was unhappy when his regular order of a tall iced coffee with cream and caramel syrup jumped to $5.35 because of the new 80-cent charge for the syrup. He canceled his order. 'I don't plan on going back.' The tariffs could also threaten another morning staple. About 90% of the fresh orange juice and 55% of the frozen orange juice that the United States imports comes from Brazil, according to Agriculture Department data. Brazil also exports large quantities of concentrated orange pulp, what is then turned into orange juice. And Florida, a major domestic producer of the fruit, has faced recent growing difficulties partly because of a citrus disease. 'There would be a huge impact on people who drink orange juice because Florida can't possibly make up the slack,' Gantz said. This article originally appeared in The New York Times. Copyright 2025
3 days ago
Trump administration sues California over egg prices and blames animal welfare laws
The Trump administration is suing the state of California to block animal welfare laws that it says unconstitutionally helped send egg prices soaring. But a group that spearheaded the requirements pushed back, blaming bird flu for the hit to consumers' pocketbooks. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in California on Wednesday, challenges voter initiatives that passed in 2018 and 2008. They require that all eggs sold in California come from cage-free hens. The Trump administration says the law imposes burdensome red tape on the production of eggs and egg products across the country because of the state's outsize role in the national economy. 'It is one thing if California passes laws that affects its own State, it is another when those laws affect other States in violation of the U.S. Constitution,' U.S. Agriculture Brooke Rollins said in a statement Thursday. "Thankfully, President Trump is standing up against this overreach.' Egg prices soared last year and earlier this year due in large part to bird flu, which has forced producers to destroy nearly 175 million birds since early 2022. But prices have come down sharply recently. While the Trump administration claims credit for that, seasonal factors are also important. Avian influenza, which is spread by wild birds, tends to spike during the spring and fall migrations and drop in summer. 'Pointing fingers won't change the fact that it is the President's economic policies that have been destructive," the California Department of Justice said in a statement Friday. "We'll see him in court.' The average national price for a dozen Grade A eggs declined to $5.12 in April and $4.55 in May after reaching a record $6.23 in March, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. But the May price was still 68.5% higher than a year earlier. 'Trump's back to his favorite hobby: blaming California for literally everything,' Gov. Gavin Newsom's office said in a social media post. The federal complaint alleges that California contributed to the rise in egg prices with regulations that forced farmers across the country to adopt more expensive production practices. The lawsuit also asserts that it is the federal government's legal prerogative to regulate egg production. So it seeks to permanently block enforcement of the California regulations that flowed from the two ballot measures. 'Americans across the country have suffered the consequences of liberal policies causing massive inflation for everyday items like eggs,' Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. 'Under President Trump's leadership, we will use the full extent of federal law to ensure that American families are free from oppressive regulatory burdens and restore American prosperity.' While 2018's Proposition 12 also banned the sale of pork and veal in California from animals raised in cages that don't meet minimum size requirements, the lawsuit only focuses on the state's egg rules. Humane World for Animals, which was named the Humane Society of the United States when it spearheaded the passage of Proposition 12, says avian influenza and other factors drove up egg prices, not animal welfare laws. And it says much of the U.S. egg industry went cage-free anyway because of demand from consumers who don't want eggs from hens confined to tiny spaces. 'California has prohibited the sale of cruelly produced eggs for more than a decade — law that has been upheld by courts at every level, including the Supreme Court. Blaming 2025 egg prices on these established animal welfare standards shows that this case is about pure politics, not constitutional law,' Sara Amundson, president of the Humane World Action Fund, said in a statement. The American Egg Board, which represents the industry, said Friday that it will monitor the progress of the lawsuit while continuing to comply with California's laws, and that it appreciates Rollins' efforts to support farmers in their fight against bird flu and to stabilize the egg supply. 'Egg farmers have been both responsive and responsible in meeting changing demand for cage-free eggs, while supporting all types of egg production, and continuing to provide options in the egg case for consumers,' the board said in a statement.
San Francisco Chronicle
3 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump administration sues California over egg prices and blames animal welfare laws
The Trump administration is suing the state of California to block animal welfare laws that it says unconstitutionally helped send egg prices soaring. But a group that spearheaded the requirements pushed back, blaming bird flu for the hit to consumers' pocketbooks. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in California on Wednesday, challenges voter initiatives that passed in 2018 and 2008. They require that all eggs sold in California come from cage-free hens. The Trump administration says the law imposes burdensome red tape on the production of eggs and egg products across the country because of the state's outsize role in the national economy. 'It is one thing if California passes laws that affects its own State, it is another when those laws affect other States in violation of the U.S. Constitution,' U.S. Agriculture Brooke Rollins said in a statement Thursday. "Thankfully, President Trump is standing up against this overreach.' Egg prices soared last year and earlier this year due in large part to bird flu, which has forced producers to destroy nearly 175 million birds since early 2022. But prices have come down sharply recently. While the Trump administration claims credit for that, seasonal factors are also important. Avian influenza, which is spread by wild birds, tends to spike during the spring and fall migrations and drop in summer. 'Pointing fingers won't change the fact that it is the President's economic policies that have been destructive," the California Department of Justice said in a statement Friday. "We'll see him in court.' The average national price for a dozen Grade A eggs declined to $5.12 in April and $4.55 in May after reaching a record $6.23 in March, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. But the May price was still 68.5% higher than a year earlier. The federal complaint alleges that California contributed to the rise in egg prices with regulations that forced farmers across the country to adopt more expensive production practices. The lawsuit also asserts that it is the federal government's legal prerogative to regulate egg production. So it seeks to permanently block enforcement of the California regulations that flowed from the two ballot measures. 'Americans across the country have suffered the consequences of liberal policies causing massive inflation for everyday items like eggs,' Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. 'Under President Trump's leadership, we will use the full extent of federal law to ensure that American families are free from oppressive regulatory burdens and restore American prosperity.' While 2018's Proposition 12 also banned the sale of pork and veal in California from animals raised in cages that don't meet minimum size requirements, the lawsuit only focuses on the state's egg rules. Humane World for Animals, which was named the Humane Society of the United States when it spearheaded the passage of Proposition 12, says avian influenza and other factors drove up egg prices, not animal welfare laws. And it says much of the U.S. egg industry went cage-free anyway because of demand from consumers who don't want eggs from hens confined to tiny spaces. 'California has prohibited the sale of cruelly produced eggs for more than a decade — law that has been upheld by courts at every level, including the Supreme Court. Blaming 2025 egg prices on these established animal welfare standards shows that this case is about pure politics, not constitutional law,' Sara Amundson, president of the Humane World Action Fund, said in a statement. The American Egg Board, which represents the industry, said Friday that it will monitor the progress of the lawsuit while continuing to comply with California's laws, and that it appreciates Rollins' efforts to support farmers in their fight against bird flu and to stabilize the egg supply. 'Egg farmers have been both responsive and responsible in meeting changing demand for cage-free eggs, while supporting all types of egg production, and continuing to provide options in the egg case for consumers,' the board said in a statement.
