2 ms·

But in 2005, the US Congress reviewed and modified daylight saving. That shows inertia can be overcome when the populace wants it. There wouldn't have been any

by raldi 10y ago

But in 2005, the US Congress reviewed and modified daylight saving. That shows inertia can be overcome when the populace wants it. There wouldn't have been any issues of synchronicity. And yet Congress decided to keep DST. Again, do you believe they misrepresented the will of the people? If so, what evidence is there to support that claim?

Dylan16807 10y ago
Changing the day doesn't affect anyone much except calendar makers. Much less inertia there than with getting rid of DST. I certainly believe that congress would rather make a show about 'saving energy' than address the fact that it doesn't. That doesn't mean they are going against the "will of the people", but the people are half-informed at best. The question is what people would vote for in a popular election, without worrying about soundbites, and with an entire 5+ minutes of research into the topic. The actions of the legislature are not a great proxy for this.
- raldi 10y ago
  > The question is what people would vote for in a popular election I totally agree. > with an entire 5+ minutes of research into the topic You're being condescending and dismissive here. I've acknowledged that many people agree with your opinion that an extra hour of morning sunlight all winter long is not worth the hassle of changing clocks twice a year; you seem to be saying that only an ignorant person could possibly have the opposite opinion. Is that really what you believe?
  - Dylan16807 10y ago
    > your opinion My? > you seem to be saying that only an ignorant person could possibly have the opposite opinion Not at all. I'm saying that most people are uninformed, and that the ratio of votes would almost certainly be different if people were generally informed. This goes for most topics! There's nothing specific to any opinion. It could be that there's actually more anti-DST misinformation than pro-DST misinformation, and being informed could make people like DST more. I have no idea, I just want people to not be voting based on misinformation.

by raldi 10y ago

Dylan16807 10y ago

Changing the day doesn't affect anyone much except calendar makers. Much less inertia there than with getting rid of DST. I certainly believe that congress would rather make a show about 'saving energy' than address the fact that it doesn't. That doesn't mean they are going against the "will of the people", but the people are half-informed at best. The question is what people would vote for in a popular election, without worrying about soundbites, and with an entire 5+ minutes of research into the topic. The actions of the legislature are not a great proxy for this.

raldi 10y ago
> The question is what people would vote for in a popular election I totally agree. > with an entire 5+ minutes of research into the topic You're being condescending and dismissive here. I've acknowledged that many people agree with your opinion that an extra hour of morning sunlight all winter long is not worth the hassle of changing clocks twice a year; you seem to be saying that only an ignorant person could possibly have the opposite opinion. Is that really what you believe?
- Dylan16807 10y ago
  > your opinion My? > you seem to be saying that only an ignorant person could possibly have the opposite opinion Not at all. I'm saying that most people are uninformed, and that the ratio of votes would almost certainly be different if people were generally informed. This goes for most topics! There's nothing specific to any opinion. It could be that there's actually more anti-DST misinformation than pro-DST misinformation, and being informed could make people like DST more. I have no idea, I just want people to not be voting based on misinformation.