Should Las Vegas switch to Mountain Time and drop DST?

[jeffandnicole]

1) Arizona tourists are important, and they can still be important without overlooking the fact that something like 65% of Las Vegas's tourist revenue comes from California. The Arizona share still matters, but it's nowhere near that.

Then what's the percentage of tourists/other business that comes from Arizona.  If 65% of the revenue comes from California, then 35% comes from all other originations, meaning Arizona's contribution must be very small.

[kkt]

And without DST, the observed time in Las Vegas would only be different from California for part of the year (the winter).  Most of the year Las Vegas would remain the same time as California.

So just when you think you've got it figured out that L.A. and L.V. are in the same time zone, standard times comes around and screws you up?  Not an improvement.

[corco]

1) Arizona tourists are important, and they can still be important without overlooking the fact that something like 65% of Las Vegas's tourist revenue comes from California. The Arizona share still matters, but it's nowhere near that.

Then what's the percentage of tourists/other business that comes from Arizona.  If 65% of the revenue comes from California, then 35% comes from all other originations, meaning Arizona's contribution must be very small.

Okay, that prompted me to check actual numbers.

http://www.lvcva.com/includes/content/images/media/docs/2013-Las_Vegas_Visitor_Profile.pdf is the closest thing I could find.

Page 87 has visitors by state in percentage. To summarize, in 2013:

California - 33%
Foreign - 20%
Other Western States - 13%
Southern States - 12%
Midwestern States - 10%
Arizona - 6%
Eastern States - 6%

"Other Western" includes visitors from outside of Clark County but still in NV, WA, OR, ID, MT, WY, UT, CO, NM, AK. Most of that population is on the pacific time zone.

[thenetwork]

The State of Utah is considering abandoning DST.

And people in Colorado are pushing for year-round Daylight Time...


Besides, I like the fact that when leaving Mesquite, NV on the I-15 North on-ramp, it takes me a shade over 60 minutes to get up to the posted speed!   

[Molandfreak]

YES!


And while we're at it, the whole country should abolish the useless DST system.

[kkt]

YES!


And while we're at it, the whole country should abolish the useless DST system.

Is it a "who can use the biggest font wins" contest?

I like DST.  I'd much rather have a useful hour of daylight in the evening instead of between 3 and 4 AM in the summer, and I don't want to trade it for a dark morning commute in the winter.

[Molandfreak]

I like DST.  I'd much rather have a useful hour of daylight in the evening instead of between 3 and 4 AM in the summer, and I don't want to trade it for a dark morning commute in the winter.

Then why not have that useful hour year-round, like Nevada's time zone switch would effectively do, and has already been done in Saskatchewan? There is absolutely nothing else worthwhile about daylight saving time in the present day, so why do you switch back in the winter? It's going to get dark no matter what in the winter. It's winter after all, and completely illogical to go back the hour in the spring at the cost of our health. Screw the time changes; they are an unnecessary burden on society and cause heart attacks and suicides.

[dfwmapper]

I propose a Nighttime Saving Time for the parts of the country south of the 35th parallel. Make it get dark (and cool off) an hour earlier in the summer so the A/C runs less when people are at home.

[jeffandnicole]

I like DST.  I'd much rather have a useful hour of daylight in the evening instead of between 3 and 4 AM in the summer, and I don't want to trade it for a dark morning commute in the winter.

Then why not have that useful hour year-round, like Nevada's time zone switch would effectively do, and has already been done in Saskatchewan? There is absolutely nothing else worthwhile about daylight saving time in the present day, so why do you switch back in the winter? It's going to get dark no matter what in the winter. It's winter after all, and completely illogical to go back the hour in the spring at the cost of our health. Screw the time changes; they are an unnecessary burden on society and cause heart attacks and suicides.

You're referring to this article too, right?  Yes, we all have the internet...

But while researchers have looked at a number of health trends surrounding the first day of daylight saving time -- including apparent upticks in accidents, heart attacks and suicides --­­ it's unclear whether the adjusted clock setting is itself responsible for these health issues.

"It's not really understood why some of these health problems that are published coincide with the time change,"  said Russell Rosenberg, vice chairman of the National Sleep Foundation. "We don't have studies that show the time change actually causes these problems."  

http://www.livescience.com/13183-daylight-savings-time-affect-health.html

[english si]

Then why not have that useful hour year-round

Because you can't move light from between 3am and 4am, or even 5am to 6am, to the evening in winter - there isn't the light to move!

In winter all DST does is put the morning commute in the dark so that the evening commute can remain in the dark. The light from 7-8am is not used more usefully when applied between 4-5pm, whereas in May, the light from 4-5am is better used when applied between 7-8pm.

Screw the time changes; they are an unnecessary burden on society and cause heart attacks and suicides.

It's not the change that causes issues, but the darker mornings (they decline briefly, rather than increase briefly, with the Fall back, for instance). Less DST is the answer, not more.

Our (European) late March spring-forward is about a week too late, and our late October fall-back is about three weeks too late (October is a horrible month, then the clocks go back and everyone is happier). DST all year round would make those four weeks of increased issues (health issues, psychological issues, more road deaths, etc) last for 5 months. Moving the UK to CET would extend it another couple, as the change to/from DST would have the same 'too early and not early enough' that we currently have.

Sure, lower latitudes of the US aren't going to be quite so affected as the UK, mostly in the 50s degrees north, but much more of the US is at the western end of the time zone.

This video talks of the Jet Lag caused by time zones (and social clocks) being earlier than the solar clock (ie the sun is getting up after you are), and some of the issues it brings.

I propose a Nighttime Saving Time for the parts of the country south of the 35th parallel. Make it get dark (and cool off) an hour earlier in the summer so the A/C runs less when people are at home.

Though the overall effect on energy consumption will be similarly minuscule to that of shifting daylight later has at northern latitudes, I like your thinking!

[1995hoo]

I propose a Nighttime Saving Time for the parts of the country south of the 35th parallel. Make it get dark (and cool off) an hour earlier in the summer so the A/C runs less when people are at home.

We run our AC at a lower temperature at night for sleeping than we do during the day, though I suppose it has to work less to get to that temperature since it's not as hot outside.

(During the winter the heat is set considerably lower overnight for sleeping than it is during the day.)

[02 Park Ave]

DST has been made to be for longer and longer periods of time over the years.  It is questionable whether any energy savings were accomplished with the most recent extensions up to early March and back to early November.  They were touted as being energy saving measures.

If we have to have DST, the politicians should only impose it upon us from late April to late September.

[kkt]

I like DST.  I'd much rather have a useful hour of daylight in the evening instead of between 3 and 4 AM in the summer, and I don't want to trade it for a dark morning commute in the winter.

Then why not have that useful hour year-round, like Nevada's time zone switch would effectively do, and has already been done in Saskatchewan? There is absolutely nothing else worthwhile about daylight saving time in the present day, so why do you switch back in the winter? It's going to get dark no matter what in the winter. It's winter after all, and completely illogical to go back the hour in the spring at the cost of our health. Screw the time changes; they are an unnecessary burden on society and cause heart attacks and suicides.

If DST were continued in the winter, it would be dark for the morning commute.  It's a lot harder to get moving in the morning when it's pitch dark.  Darkness during the commute makes it just a bit more dangerous, both from lack of visibility and sleepy drivers.  People have been getting up in the morning when it starts getting light for millions of years.  That shouldn't change just because we have clocks now.

[Duke87]

It also doesn't help that culturally we have decided that there is a correlation between how early someone wakes up and how good their work ethic is. People who wake up early and get to work early are hard workers, people who wake up late and get to work late are lazy. Obviously a lot of jobs require someone be at work by a certain time for very practical reasons (store needs to open, bus needs to leave the depot, etc.) but many really don't require this and only do so because of social convention. Who was it that decided that everyone who works in an office ought to be at work at or before 9 AM? What difference does it actually make what hours someone works so long as they keep all their appointments and get all their work done? If we have a problem with people having to drag themselves out of bed too early perhaps the solution is to just let them sleep later.

[jwolfer]

It also doesn't help that culturally we have decided that there is a correlation between how early someone wakes up and how good their work ethic is. People who wake up early and get to work early are hard workers, people who wake up late and get to work late are lazy. Obviously a lot of jobs require someone be at work by a certain time for very practical reasons (store needs to open, bus needs to leave the depot, etc.) but many really don't require this and only do so because of social convention. Who was it that decided that everyone who works in an office ought to be at work at or before 9 AM? What difference does it actually make what hours someone works so long as they keep all their appointments and get all their work done? If we have a problem with people having to drag themselves out of bed too early perhaps the solution is to just let them sleep later.

Amen.. I hate the morning Nazis. I am a night person. I loved worjlking 2nd shift .. 1-9 or 2-10 in college... Still could go out after work.. Sleep in most days and if needed I could get up early and take are of business

[dfwmapper]

I propose a Nighttime Saving Time for the parts of the country south of the 35th parallel. Make it get dark (and cool off) an hour earlier in the summer so the A/C runs less when people are at home.

We run our AC at a lower temperature at night for sleeping than we do during the day, though I suppose it has to work less to get to that temperature since it's not as hot outside.

(During the winter the heat is set considerably lower overnight for sleeping than it is during the day.)

Basically, if you get home at 6 and go to bed at 11, the A/C runs more if it gets dark at 9 than if it gets dark at 7. Shifting more of the hottest part of the day to the hours when people are at work and have their programmable thermostats set to warmer temperatures. Makes the evening hours more bearable to spend outside.

[vtk]

DST doesn't make sunrise & sunset later, it just shifts everybody's schedule earlier.  It's not necessary.  If a community decides it would like to have more daylight after work, it can simply schedule its daytime activities earlier. 

The only benefit of DST is that it's a mechanism by which everybody's schedule is seasonally adjusted in a coordinated manner, minimizing conflicts that would otherwise arise from seasonally-varying schedules.  But this is only a meaningful benefit if the seasonal adjustment makes sense in the first place, which is clearly a point on which there is no consensus.

[kkt]

The only benefit of DST is that it's a mechanism by which everybody's schedule is seasonally adjusted in a coordinated manner, minimizing conflicts that would otherwise arise from seasonally-varying schedules. 

Right.  Very few people are so independent of the culture that they can decide to adjust their schedule without cooperation from their workplace, their own or their children's school schedule, bus or carpool schedule, etc.  One could ask why the minority who dislike changing their sleep-wake schedule don't adjust their schedules to be one hour later during DST.

But this is only a meaningful benefit if the seasonal adjustment makes sense in the first place, which is clearly a point on which there is no consensus.

Actually there's a strong consensus and a vocal few who don't like it.

[silverback1065]

DST should be dropped in the entire US, it's pointless, costs everyone money, and gives us no extra daylight.

[english si]

It also doesn't help that culturally we have decided that there is a correlation between how early someone wakes up and how good their work ethic is.

And the year-round DST / being a time zone ahead always strikes me as the argument of those people. Indiana having DST, Spain on CET, etc were blatently decided at 8am by the people who think that 8-5 is harder working than 9-7!

My brother, on the first day of his last job (programming), aimed to get to the office at half 8. It was unlocked at 9. The next person on his team showed up at half 9, as 'core hours' started then and then most of the team turned up at 10 without any issue that they were meant to be there 9.30-4.30, because the managers knew they put the hours in.

A high school with high truancy rates (in Newcastle upon Tyne) trialled shifting the hours back an hour, so 9-3 became 10-4. Truancy plummeted.

[jeffandnicole]

There's a few issues with pushing high school times back.  Depending on the district, the buses that transport high schoolers also transport elementary school kids, so they have to stagger their times.  And HS sports are a big deal, so all the schools would have to change their times.  And then you'll hear from those that have jobs after school and won't be able to make them and have time to do homework with less time.

Whether are not one agrees with these reasons, they are the traditional reasons why high schools typically don't start later here in the US.

[vdeane]

If staggered times is an issue, simply flip them.  Currently elementary schools start late and high schools early (often earlier than workplaces, even).  This is ass-backwards.  Teenagers have a circadian rhythm that's offset a couple hours relative to the rest of the population.  Give the high school students the extra hour, move the elementary kids back, and leave the platitudes saying "you'll just be getting up early anyways when you're in the workforce so this is good practice" unsaid.

IMO HS sports are WAY over-emphasized.  Perhaps this would be a good reason to de-emphasize them.

The jobs can shift their hours, and homework will probably take less time if the students aren't chronically sleep deprived.  Teenagers stay up late/sleep in late because their body is wired that way, not because they're "lazy", no matter how much the morning nazis will try to say otherwise.

I hate the cultural emphasis on morning.  I'm a night owl by heart.  It takes great effort to get up for work every day and the only thing that wakes me up is the drive to work (good thing I'm a roadgeek, isn't it?).  Meanwhile, at night when I should be getting ready for bed, I'm wide awake and have a desire to be productive.  It takes me an hour to fall asleep each night (which is actually a vast improvement over the 2-3 hour delay I was cursed with in high school/college).

[oscar]

There's a few issues with pushing high school times back.  Depending on the district, the buses that transport high schoolers also transport elementary school kids, so they have to stagger their times.  And HS sports are a big deal, so all the schools would have to change their times.  And then you'll hear from those that have jobs after school and won't be able to make them and have time to do homework with less time.

Staggering times sometimes is also a temporary fix for school overcrowding.  The high school I went to (well over 2000 students) was so crowded that there were ten one-hour (MOL) periods, with staggered schedules where the unlucky students (mainly freshmen) had to straggle in super-early for period 1 but left early in the afternoon, while others both arrived and stayed late.  Lunch breaks were staggered, too, to avoid mid-day classroom overcrowding.  The high school's buses were out and about most of the day, and couldn't be coordinated with elementary and junior high school (grades 7-8, unlike middle schools in other states) bus schedules.

Before I graduated, the overcrowding problem was fixed by opening a second campus, which later became a separate high school. 

This was in the San Diego area, where fortunately hours of daylight don't vary as much as in the northern latitudes. 

[jeffandnicole]

If staggered times is an issue, simply flip them.  Currently elementary schools start late and high schools early (often earlier than workplaces, even).  This is ass-backwards.  Teenagers have a circadian rhythm that's offset a couple hours relative to the rest of the population.  Give the high school students the extra hour, move the elementary kids back, and leave the platitudes saying "you'll just be getting up early anyways when you're in the workforce so this is good practice" unsaid.

Good luck with getting elementary school kids to school by 7:15am or so!  While some kids are good at waking up early, I bet the majority aren't.  Plus, unlike high schoolers that can make their own breakfast (or whatever they want to call breakfast), elementary schoolers generally need someone to make it for them, or need supervision. And that means an earlier wakeup call for mom/dad.  Then they need to drive them to school, God forbid they walk out the front door to their bus stop at the end of the driveway, so that's an early start there too. 

Again, not that I disagree with some of the reasons, but there's a whole lot of reasons why parents won't put up with their 1st grader starting school before the sun barely rises in the winter.

The jobs can shift their hours

That's not really possible.  Jobs schedule their hours based on when people are in the stores, at restaurants, etc.  You can't ask the entire population to shift their shopping & eating habits.

I hate the cultural emphasis on morning.  I'm a night owl by heart.  It takes great effort to get up for work every day and the only thing that wakes me up is the drive to work (good thing I'm a roadgeek, isn't it?).  Meanwhile, at night when I should be getting ready for bed, I'm wide awake and have a desire to be productive.  It takes me an hour to fall asleep each night (which is actually a vast improvement over the 2-3 hour delay I was cursed with in high school/college).

This is typical of me too. I'm now 40 years old, and I still would rather wake up later and go to bed later, rather than be an earlier riser.

[english si]

There's a few issues with pushing high school times back.  Depending on the district, the buses that transport high schoolers also transport elementary school kids, so they have to stagger their times.  And HS sports are a big deal, so all the schools would have to change their times.  And then you'll hear from those that have jobs after school and won't be able to make them and have time to do homework with less time.

None of these issues apply to the UK though, which is where the trial was.

Including after school jobs - they might have them (more normally a before school paper round), but they are very limited as to hours (I think 1h per day during the week until 16). And there's no reason why students have to do homework (which there is excessive amounts of anyway) before going to sleep - they still get the same amount of time to do it and could do it in the morning if needbe.

While our extracurricular, inter-school, sports aren't as big a thing here, and despite our darker evenings (more north, less DST), we managed to play winter-season (soccer, rugby, (field) hockey, etc) sports after school despite our school day ending at 3.45pm without much hassle*. If they are a big thing in the US, it just makes it easier to afford flood lights and so on.

*Cricket and Tennis, early or late in the summer season, might be a bit harder due to the longer game time and the need for light. I believe Cricket is to blame for the awfully depressing October mornings when we're on DST, but shouldn't be - the only bad thing about the sport!