I would agree that permanent standard time would be better (or, in my opinion, would be better to do time zones based on mean solar time). Of course the schedu

I would agree that permanent standard time would be better (or, in my opinion, would be better to do time zones based on mean solar time). Of course the schedules and clocks together are based on the arbitrary conventions anyways, and permanent time (standard or DST) would at least make it consistent. So the reasons they give here according to sleeping, biology, etc are merely making it consistent, and improved according to existing conventions, which of course does make it better , but nevertheless I had considered the other reason too according to the solar noon/midnight by the natural time keeping (although "0" instead of "12" might perhaps be more logical). > Of course a lot of the general public seems to lean towards year-round DST (e.g., "so I can do stuff after work") This is the problem due to bad work schedules, and due to the civilization and the society, and love of money, etc, independently of the clock. The clock just adds another problem by trying to correct an existing problem.