5 ms·
Studies also show that parents have to get the kids dropped off before work. And 8:30 is stupid early.
by nemo44x 5y ago
Studies also show that parents have to get the kids dropped off before work. And 8:30 is stupid early.
- colordrops 5y ago8:30 is a number. We should base schedules around when the sun is out rather than a number.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoWouldn't that defeat the purpose of this shift? If we are trying to give workers more daylight in the evening, then we shift the work and school day later, the impact would be nil. Fundamentally, for this change to satisfy its mandate, the kids have to to to school in the dark during the winter. Fwiw, I think it's a fine thing. I always found it very romantic to go to school when it is still dark when I was young.
- colordrops 5y agoNo, we should get rid of any shift of the clock, and then set schedules for work and school based on the sun. The start and end times of school and work should change during certain parts of the year if there is concern about daylight.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoI understand you feel that way, but that's more or less the purpose and effect of the daylight savings time shift. That's the status quo. It's exactly what many of us want to see eliminated.
- colordrops 5y agoNo, changing school and work times only changes school and work systems. Changing the entire clock time adds endless complexity to computer systems and society as a whole. It's like global vs local vars, the scope is too much.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoOkay, but most folks who want to change to permanent DST don't care about the effect on computer systems. They want more light in the evening. Your proposal would not satisfy the primary goal of the proponents of this policy. It would also still require one or more coordinated, discrete shifts in the schedules of schools and workplaces, which would likely be more complicated for computers and other systems than the status quo.
- colordrops 5y agoWe shouldn't satisfy their goal. It's not their business to impose this on all of society. We should stick to a standard time and let individuals or groups do whatever they need at the local level. Most other countries do this and they are fine. YAGNI. No need for additional complexity.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoThe status quo is more complex than what the senate has voted for (it requires transitions, the shifting of schedules twice a year, etc.). The new approach is less complex. The assertion that the time is "not someone's business" is incorrect. The time is everyone's business. We are going to stick to a standard time after this policy -- it's going to be daylight savings time all the time, although we will probably stop calling it that after we all get used to the policy. Individuals or groups will be equally free to adopt their own schedules both before and after this policy change -- this policy is not a change on that front.
- colordrops 5y ago> The assertion that the time is "not someone's business" is incorrect. The time is everyone's business. You misunderstood my meaning. I understand that everyone is concerned and affected by time. What I meant is it's not in their purview to push such things on the public. Once again, the rest of the world works perfectly fine without the added complexity, so it should be proven with strong evidence rather than vague arguments that the added complexity is worth it. The rest of the world works perfectly well without DST.
- spiznnx 5y agoIt's a shame that public transit can't take kids to school in America. There would be a lot of economic benefit.
- giantg2 5y agoI know a kid in middle school that wasn't allowed to literally walk across the street to school (wasn't even a busy road). The bus would pick up the kid, move about 10 feet, and turn into the parking lot. Supervision and legalities related to it can be boarderline oppressive in some places.
- HWR_14 5y agoEveryplace in America (except apparently California, and a couple major cities like NYC where there is areal public transit) there are school buses.
- spiznnx 5y agoGenuinely curious, why do working parents drop off their kids if there is a school bus?
- giantg2 5y agoWhy is 8:30 "stupid early"? It doesn't seem bad at all to me. The majority of people have to be at work before then too. https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/overflow-data-finds-the-average-time-most-americans-get-to-work https://www.thrillist.com/news/nation/overflow-data-finds-th...
- nemo44x 5y agoTypo - was saying it isn't stupid early.
- giantg2 5y agoOh, ok.
- HWR_14 5y agoBecause schools don't pick up kids at 8:30. If you look up that stupid article whining about kids waiting for the bus in the dark (which is a non-issue), they were waiting at 7 am
- giantg2 5y agoIt should at least be twilight at 7am, not fully dark. And that's using a high latidute (US) example of Massachusetts.
- CWuestefeld 5y agoVirtually no parents have to get the kids dropped off at all. The vast majority, afaik, can rely on a school bus to pick them up. And IMHO, beyond elementary school (and perhaps earlier) there's no reason most kids can't be unsupervised briefly before letting themselves out to get to the bus, or after being dropped off by the bus. See the whole thing about free range kids, helicopter parents, and so forth.