Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site brl-vgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!brl-tgr!brl-vgr!wmartin
From: wmartin@brl-vgr.ARPA (Will Martin )
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: SpringForward
Message-ID: <1670@brl-vgr.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 9-May-84 11:36:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-vgr.1670
Posted: Wed May  9 11:36:12 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 12-May-84 12:02:39 EDT
References: <452@opus.UUCP>, <738@shark.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistics Research Lab
Lines: 47

The only sensible situation is to have what we call "Daylight Savings"
Time as our "Standard" Time. That is, one Spring, move forward one
hour and then NEVER move back again. This was proposed as an "energy
conservation" measure back during the oil embargo, but the other advantages
of it far outweigh any conservation gains.

Why should we be denied the daylight at the end of the workday during
Winter, anyway? We end up going to work in darkness, and then coming
home in twilight. (I work in a place with flextime, but the hours are
usually 0730-1615, which was the pre-flex standard.) What difference
does it make that it is dark outside until 1 or two hours after you have
started working? It is much more worthwhile to have some time after
work when you can still see outside to do a little yard work or other
tasks where daylight is necessary.

The standard argument I heard repeatedly during the proposed "year-round
daylight-saving time" was about school children going to school in
the dark. This is asinine: a) most are bussed anyway; b) the world should
be arranged for the benefit of real working people, not school kids;
c) schools can change their hours at the drop of an administrator --
they have around here to conform with the bussing nonsense anyway! --
so they could set up any schedule they want.

The second standard argument is that "the farmers won't stand for it."
Again, worthless, because: a) there are a lot fewer farmers now than
there used to be; b) most of those left run agri-businesses, not farms;
c) the hours of stores are not as restricted as they once were. [I think
this was the historical origin of farmers' opposition to Daylight Saving --
some conflict that precluded them from doing their farm work in daylight
and also getting to stores in town on the same day.]

Whether you like or dislike this concept has something to do with 
where you live within the time zone. I don't have the relationships
really clear in my mind, but people near a zone boundary have 
a great deal more effect from an hour change than those in the
middle of the zone. This is not only the hassles involved in 
commerce or communications across the line, but the position of
the sun in the sky in relation to the clock time. Anybody want
to post a laymen's explanation of the details of this?
Who is better off, those in the zone center, the west part, or the
east part of a time zone? ("Better" meaning having more daylight
later in relation to clock time would mean that the Western inhabitants
are benefitted, but which is "better" if that is defined as clock time
agreeing with sun time?)

Will