Why is there resistance to changing the clocks so we don't have to move them forward and back twice a year?

Question

We are told that it will improve safety on the roads and I don't think we have much of a farming community of whom it was first designed to assist. For several years now safety campaigners have been calling for it, so why hasn't it happened? And will it ever happen?

Answer 1

Compromise - set the clocks GMT+30mins...

Answer 2

I reckon the National Union of Clock and Watchmakers are so concerned that their No 1 money making opportunity, when people try to alter their clocks and wreck them, by dropping or pulling the winder off, that they offered New Labour a £ 1 000 000 loan to keep changing them, they wanted 1/2 an hour in September and another in November but could not afford £ 2 000 000. Alternative theory is they buy a super 18" steak and ale pie for John Prescott every Tuesday. Can't get confirmation you understand but this is my understanding of the situation.
The matter will be resolved in 2016 when European standard time takes effect being some 21 minutes than BST and based on the Paris Eiffel Tower Meridian, in addition each week will be 10 days and discussions are proceeding regarding Months and years, however there are no proposals to accept the Russian Mafias offer to slow down or speed up the earths rotations by blowing up China to facilitate this.

Answer 3

We move them forward and back because it cuts down on energy usage during peak hours. It was a method employed during World War II to still have a functional workday AND not have people burning huge amounts of power from dawn to dusk. By my understanding it still works in that regard but to a lesser degree given people don't sacrifice like that anymore. It's kinda amazing how much energy really is saved by the fact we aren't home for that extra hour of daylight in summer months. So.. to answer the safety part of it, no.. it would not be safer. Surely road safety would improve, but I would gladly trade road safety for the ability to dodge roaming blackouts during summer months. I'll take infants, unhealthy, and senior citizens over bad drivers any day. Will it ever happen? Maybe... I'd suggest speaking to your congressman or political whatever and push for renewable energy sources. If solar energy could be harnassed to the point that it would be better to be home when the sun is out, then daylight savings is no longer needed. Also, the power grid is still in poor shape and needs a revamping. With a combination of renewable energy sources and a full grid restructuring, you'd have what you want. Oh.. and if safety critics were really wanting safe roads, they'd ban alcohol again :o)

Answer 4

I wish they'd put a stop to it. It's ridiculous and hard on the human body.
Doctors say to stay in a set sleep pattern is better for your health and then they go and play with the clocks and screw us all up for two weeks until we adjust to it.
I wish they'd pick a time and stay there. Before or after or in between, I don't care, just pick one and stay with it.
I don't see where safety has anything to do with it, but I could be wrong. It's supposed to have something to do with energy consumption now. I think, in the beginning, it had something to do with the farmers, but now it's the energy companies.
I used to get up at 3 AM every morning for work, then I'd have to get up at 2 AM and adjust to that. It just sucks!
We can tell the ones that thought of this stupid idea doesn't have to get up early, or work the weekends. If they did, they just might change their tunes.
I'd rather be on strictly military time and have it be the same time of day no matter where in the States you are.

Answer 5

There are many arguments for and against changing the clocks. Dark mornings can be dangerous on the roads - but so can dark evenings. Farmers have to work by when it gets light, and it's more convenient for them if the rest of the country works at much the same time. It's very depressing if it gets dark mid-afternoon. You can be sure that whether we leave things the same or change them, someone will moan about it.

Answer 6

No. It was originally a British idea, but it has become a European policy, extending beyond the EU. It applies in all of the countries of Europe except Iceland (which observes UTC all year round). This period extends from 01.00 UTC on the last Sunday in March until 01.00 UTC on the last Sunday in October each year. When our European masters tell us what to do something, we obey!

Answer 7

If we didn't change the clocks then we would have dark mornings instead of evenings. It's nicer getting up with some form of light for a start! People are more dozy in the mornings so it would be more dangerous, we should leave things as they are.

Answer 8

This was stopped for a while in the 60s. I liked it.
My personal preference would be for permanent tripple summer time, so that I could always arrive home from work in the daylight.
This is only a personal desire - I know postmen/farmers etc would go the other way

Answer 9

In Australia it is called 'Daylight Saving' but many people don't like it.
Families with young children often have trouble changing over sleep patterns; farmers with animals .... the same. (Milking cows);
Where do you get the idea it will ímprove safety on the roads?
If people want more daylight... let them get up earlier!

Answer 10

It's just annoying. I think people feel like is causes further disorientation at a time shen seasons are changing and therefore our routines anyway. Just further disruption.