- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
- cross-posted to:
- hackernews@derp.foo
In the past six years, 19 states have made efforts to move to year-round daylight saving time. So what’s in the way?
In the past six years, 19 states have made efforts to move to year-round daylight saving time. So what’s in the way?
People arguing for our against really need to give their latitude. I’d imagine the further north you go, the more you are in favor of permanent dst.
I’m at 56°N. DST does exactly fuck all but mess with my sleep. I’d rather just stay at one time all fuckin year. In winter it doesn’t make a fuckin lick of difference if the sun rises at 8 or 9 or 10, it’s dark when I leave the house, and it’s dark well before I get back in.
I used to live at 49°N and that was actually worse.
41N.
And yes, this is true. But why should we be denied just because those closer to the tropics don’t have a problem? Or perhaps time zones should be rather diagonal so the the north can get later sunsets.
And those wanting standard time should also give their latitude. And rather or not someone is on the east or west end of the time zone makes a huge difference. Those further east in the time zone sees earlier sunrises and sunsets and are also more apt for daylight savings. For instance, much of New England would probably be better off in the Atlantic time zone. As it is under DST, the sun rises before 5am in Portland, ME, and EST would put sunrise before 4am! Sadly, being in the same time as certain business centers like New York and Boston (Maine wants to be the same time as Boston, and Boston the same as NYC) have made many bad time zone boundaries.
Perm DST and cut the time zones in half. Sunset should be within ~15 mins from one side of the time zone to the other; not a 45+ min difference.
The opposite. For northern latitudes, the time switch is actually somewhat beneficial. People generally don’t love waking up and going to work/school/whatever in the pitch black. DST doesn’t magically “save daylight.” The total amount is daylight is the same for either.
The only real solution is permanent Standard Time. Local businesses and governments already shift their business hours as they see fit for other reasons, so keeping “summer hours” and “winter hours” is totally reasonable.
While we might not love going to work in pitch black, we don’t care to have all our evening in it, either. As you say, the total amount of daylight is the same, so we have to pick our poison. I’d rather have more light in the evening. I will hate the 5pm darkness that comes tomorrow.
Morning our schedules is no better than moving out clocks.
We’re kind of having the same argument in two different threads … I’m not sure which thread is better.
It’s objectively better! “Moving clocks” is effectively the same as moving schedules for individuals, but to practically coordinate with others, everybody must change their clock and therefore their schedule. Individuals and organizations already construct their schedules as needed.
Part of the issue is that we all work too damn much, anyways. The 40 hour, 5 day work week (and thus the 9-to-5) is an arbitrary concept that research has indicated may be just as effective as a shorter work week.
We have to have schedules. We have to have some consistency of time. I change my schedule, I will be out of sync with everyone else.
Yeah, we should work less, but we don’t have much of a choice. I think we are more apt to get year round DST than a shorter week.
I don’t mind dark mornings, since I’m already at work by 7am each day. But not being able to walk/bike in a park safely each afternoon, not being able to cook outside, or hang out with friends in the daylight is a bit sad. And also SAD as in the disorder since we are now inside during the only hours of daylight…
This right here is the reason I call for permanent DST.
I’m at latitude 42N and having less daylight time in the evenings during the warm months would be awful.