What is your opinion on time changes?

Question

Do you like the current time changes? Should we all have one time- like eastern standard or eastern daylight? What do you think are the advantages? The disadvantages? Why should we continue to do it?

Please let me know your reasons why! :)

Answer 1

I wish they'd leave the time the way it is now. I like it light later, but I remember it was hard to get my kids to bed when it was light past their bedtime. the farmers need one time. the cows don't know when clocks change so the farmers have to rearrange their schedules to accomodate. I don't think teh reasons they started the time change in the first place apply any more.

Answer 2

Adjusting the time forward or backwards for Spring and Fall is a measure to distribute daylight evenly during the year. More productive activities can be accomplished during daylight, IE construction, agriculture, outside maintenance of the infrastructure etc., just to name a few. To accomplish those same functions after sundown will require the use of more energy in the form of lighting. . . .and we know what additional cost that would add to the finished product.
Since we live in a country with a width of more than 3000 miles it is necessary to have time zones. Can you imagine East Coast USA working from 0800 to 1700 and shutting down when the West coast still have four more hours of sunshine left and also have to stop because it is 5:00 PM in NY?
We should continue to practice it because it puts the whole country in synchronization with the calibrated longitude time of 360* around the earth. It allows each region to function within their own time zone.

Answer 3

If we all had the same time, some of us would get up when it is dark while others would go to bed when it's bright. Graveyard shift will become dayshift and vice versa. So, let things stay as they're now.

Answer 4

when it's 7 AM in NY, it would be "very" dark in California!

Answer 5

Personally I think DST is well worth it for the effects it has overall, such as below:

Energy use:

Delaying the nominal time of sunrise and sunset increases the use of artificial light in the morning and reduces it in the evening. As Franklin's 1784 satire pointed out, energy is conserved if the evening reduction outweighs the morning increase, which can happen if more people need evening light than morning. However, statistically significant evidence for any such effect has proved elusive. The U.S. Dept. of Transportation (DOT) concluded in 1975 that DST might reduce the country's electricity usage by 1% during March and April,[4] but the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) reviewed the DOT study in 1976 and found no significant energy savings.[5] In 2000 when parts of Australia began DST in late winter, overall electricity consumption did not decrease, but the morning peak load and prices increased.[6] A 2007 simulation estimated that introducing DST to Japan would increase energy use in Osaka residences by 0.13%, with a 0.02% savings due to lighting more than outweighed by a 0.15% increase due to cooling costs; the simulation did not examine non-residential buildings.[20] In North America, there is no clear evidence that electricity will be saved by the extra DST introduced in 2007,[21] and though one utility did report a decrease in March 2007, five others did not.[22] DST may increase gasoline consumption: U.S. gasoline demand grew an extra 1% during the newly introduced DST in March 2007.[23]

Economic effects:

Retailers, sporting goods makers, and other businesses benefit from extra afternoon sunlight, as it induces customers to shop and to participate in outdoor afternoon sports. For example, in 1984 Fortune magazine estimated that a seven-week extension of DST would yield an additional US$30 million for 7-Eleven stores, and the National Golf Foundation estimated the extension would increase golf industry revenues $200 million to $300 million.[25] Conversely, DST can adversely affect farmers and others whose hours are set by the sun. For example, grain harvesting is best done after dew evaporates, so when field hands arrive and leave earlier in summer their labor is less valuable.[2] DST also hurts prime-time broadcast ratings[26] and theaters, especially drive-ins.[27]

Clock shifts correlate with decreased economic efficiency. In 2000 the daylight-saving effect implied an estimated one-day loss of $31 billion on U.S. stock exchanges.[28] Clock shifts and DST rule changes have a direct economic cost, since they entail extra work to support remote meetings, computer applications and the like. For example, a 2007 North American rule change cost an estimated $500 million to $1 billion.[29]

Public safety:

In 1975 the U.S. DOT conservatively identified a 0.7% reduction in traffic fatalities during DST, and estimated the real reduction to be 1.5% to 2%,[4] but the 1976 NBS review of the DOT study found no differences in traffic fatalities.[5] In 1995 the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety estimated a reduction of 1.2%, including a 5% reduction in crashes fatal to pedestrians.[3] Others have found similar reductions.[30] Single/Double Summer Time (SDST), a variant where clocks are one hour ahead of the sun in winter and two in summer, has been projected to reduce traffic fatalities by 3% to 4% in the UK, compared to ordinary DST.[31] It is not clear whether sleep disruption contributes to fatal accidents immediately after the spring and autumn clock shifts. A correlation between clock shifts and accidents has been observed in the U.S. but not in Sweden. If this twice-yearly effect exists, it is far smaller than the overall reduction in fatalities.[32][33]

In the 1970s the U.S. Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) found a reduction of 10% to 13% in Washington, D.C.'s violent crime rate during DST. However, the LEAA did not filter out other factors, and it examined only two cities and found crime reductions only in one and only in some crime categories; the DOT decided it was "impossible to conclude with any confidence that comparable benefits would be found nationwide."[34] Although outdoor lighting makes potential crime victims feel safer, it may actually encourage crime.[35]

In several countries, fire safety officials encourage citizens to use the two annual clock shifts as reminders to replace batteries in smoke and carbon monoxide detectors. This is especially important in autumn, just before the heating and candle season causes an increase in home fires. Similar twice-yearly tasks include reviewing and practicing fire escape and family disaster plans, inspecting vehicle lights, checking storage areas for hazardous materials, and reprogramming thermostats.[36][37][8] This is not an essential function of DST, as locations without DST can instead use the first days of spring and autumn as reminders.[38]
Health:

DST has mixed effects on health. In societies with fixed work schedules it provides more afternoon sunlight for outdoor exercise, which can contribute greatly to health. It alters sunlight exposure; whether this is beneficial depends on one's location and daily schedule, as sunlight triggers vitamin D synthesis in the skin, but overexposure can lead to skin cancer. Sunlight strongly influences seasonal affective disorder; DST may help in depression by causing individuals to arise earlier,[39] but some argue the reverse.[40] The Retinitis Pigmentosa Foundation Fighting Blindness, chaired by blind sports magnate Gordon Gund, successfully lobbied in 1985 and 2005 for DST extensions,[1][41] but DST can hurt night blindness sufferers.[42]

Clock shifts reduce sleep duration and efficiency,[43] and the government of Kazakhstan cited health complications due to clock shifts as a primary reason for abolishing DST in 2005.[44]

Complexity:

DST's clock shifts have the obvious disadvantage of complexity. People must remember to change their clocks. People who work across time zone boundaries need to keep track of multiple DST rules, as not all locations observe DST or observe it the same way. The length of the day becomes variable. Disruption to meetings, travel, broadcasts, billing systems, and records management is common, and can be expensive.[45] Near an autumn transition from 02:00 to 01:00, a clock reads times from 01:00 to 02:00 twice, possibly leading to confusion.[46]

Computer-based systems may also require downtime or restarting when clocks shift. Ignoring this requirement damaged a German steel facility in 1993.[7] Medical devices may generate adverse events that could harm patients, without being obvious to clinicians responsible for care.[47] These problems are compounded when the DST rules themselves change, as in the Year 2007 problem. Software developers must test and perhaps modify many programs, and users must install updates and restart applications.[9]

Some clock-shift problems could be avoided by adjusting clocks continuously[48] or at least more gradually—for example, Willett originally suggested weekly 20-minute transitions—but this would add complexity and has never been implemented.
The William Willett Memorial Sundial is always on DST.
The William Willett Memorial Sundial is always on DST.

DST inherits and can magnify the disadvantages of standard time. For example, when reading a sundial, one must compensate for it along with time zone and natural discrepancies.[49] Also, DST complicates time-of-day approaches for avoiding sun exposure, necessitating even more the shadow rule of avoiding sun exposure whenever your shadow is shorter than you are.