DST (2018)

[jeffandnicole]

As I mentioned earlier, we cannot let every state decide for itself. If NJ says "none" and PA says "year-round", NJ will be one hour behind PA despite being due east. Many pairs of states could have this same problem.

Why is that a problem - any more of a problem than IN being 1 hour different from IL despite being right next to it?

IL is west of IN, so being an hour behind is not that unusual. However, NJ is east of PA. Going back an hour while traveling east would be a bit strange.

Also, let's say NJ says none and PA, NY & DE all say Year Round.  As there are many workers from Philly, NYC and Wilmington that live in NJ, not only would the hour time difference mess them up, but there'd be no such advantage to employees or employers.  Factor in the vast amount of daily travel between NJ and the surrounding states, and it'll be out-right confusing.  TV/Radio schedules would be screwed up as well, since all major stations in NJ are based in Philly or NYC.

While NJ is probably a more extreme example of most, it shows why states doing whatever they want to do simply won't work, and rather than provide the benefits some people loudly exclaim, the cons are easily going to make a mess of everyone's schedule in the state.

[kalvado]

As I mentioned earlier, we cannot let every state decide for itself. If NJ says "none" and PA says "year-round", NJ will be one hour behind PA despite being due east. Many pairs of states could have this same problem.

Why is that a problem - any more of a problem than IN being 1 hour different from IL despite being right next to it?

IL is west of IN, so being an hour behind is not that unusual. However, NJ is east of PA. Going back an hour while traveling east would be a bit strange.

Also, let's say NJ says none and PA, NY & DE all say Year Round.  As there are many workers from Philly, NYC and Wilmington that live in NJ, not only would the hour time difference mess them up, but there'd be no such advantage to employees or employers.  Factor in the vast amount of daily travel between NJ and the surrounding states, and it'll be out-right confusing.  TV/Radio schedules would be screwed up as well, since all major stations in NJ are based in Philly or NYC.

While NJ is probably a more extreme example of most, it shows why states doing whatever they want to do simply won't work, and rather than provide the benefits some people loudly exclaim, the cons are easily going to make a mess of everyone's schedule in the state.

SO how Indiana and Illinois manage to get along with the problem?

[NWI_Irish96]

As I mentioned earlier, we cannot let every state decide for itself. If NJ says "none" and PA says "year-round", NJ will be one hour behind PA despite being due east. Many pairs of states could have this same problem.

Why is that a problem - any more of a problem than IN being 1 hour different from IL despite being right next to it?

IL is west of IN, so being an hour behind is not that unusual. However, NJ is east of PA. Going back an hour while traveling east would be a bit strange.

Also, let's say NJ says none and PA, NY & DE all say Year Round.  As there are many workers from Philly, NYC and Wilmington that live in NJ, not only would the hour time difference mess them up, but there'd be no such advantage to employees or employers.  Factor in the vast amount of daily travel between NJ and the surrounding states, and it'll be out-right confusing.  TV/Radio schedules would be screwed up as well, since all major stations in NJ are based in Philly or NYC.

While NJ is probably a more extreme example of most, it shows why states doing whatever they want to do simply won't work, and rather than provide the benefits some people loudly exclaim, the cons are easily going to make a mess of everyone's schedule in the state.

SO how Indiana and Illinois manage to get along with the problem?

The parts of Indiana that have the most people commuting to/from Illinois are on Central Time.  The long section down the middle where the border splits time zones doesn't really have a whole lot of people who have to deal with it.  I imagine the NJ/PA border gets a lot more action on a daily basis.

[jeffandnicole]

As I mentioned earlier, we cannot let every state decide for itself. If NJ says "none" and PA says "year-round", NJ will be one hour behind PA despite being due east. Many pairs of states could have this same problem.

Why is that a problem - any more of a problem than IN being 1 hour different from IL despite being right next to it?

IL is west of IN, so being an hour behind is not that unusual. However, NJ is east of PA. Going back an hour while traveling east would be a bit strange.

Also, let's say NJ says none and PA, NY & DE all say Year Round.  As there are many workers from Philly, NYC and Wilmington that live in NJ, not only would the hour time difference mess them up, but there'd be no such advantage to employees or employers.  Factor in the vast amount of daily travel between NJ and the surrounding states, and it'll be out-right confusing.  TV/Radio schedules would be screwed up as well, since all major stations in NJ are based in Philly or NYC.

While NJ is probably a more extreme example of most, it shows why states doing whatever they want to do simply won't work, and rather than provide the benefits some people loudly exclaim, the cons are easily going to make a mess of everyone's schedule in the state.

SO how Indiana and Illinois manage to get along with the problem?

I guess my example of 3 different major cities in 3 different states with millions of workers coming from a 4th state went right over your head, right?  Not to mention the vast amount of reverse commuting that takes place. 

Your example of just 2 states is normal along time zone lines.  Those examples also usually don't involve too many regular commuters. 

Even people driving thru would be affected, as NJ would be an island among states with different times, potentially with travelers needing to set their clocks twice, especially if they stop in the state.  In every other current example you can show, the clock change would just be once.

[tradephoric]

While NJ is probably a more extreme example of most, it shows why states doing whatever they want to do simply won't work, and rather than provide the benefits some people loudly exclaim, the cons are easily going to make a mess of everyone's schedule in the state.

States currently can decide whether to observe DST or not.  Going to year-round DST wouldn't change that.

[hbelkins]

At one point, Scott referred to this as the bi-annual DST thread, citing similar threads popping up in the spring and fall of years past. I've therefore had in mind to keep this thread active (at least intermittently) until fall, to remind users of its existence and therefore prevent another thread from popping up.

Note to self: Start thread entitled "DST (2019)" next March. 

[kkt]

At one point, Scott referred to this as the bi-annual DST thread, citing similar threads popping up in the spring and fall of years past. I've therefore had in mind to keep this thread active (at least intermittently) until fall, to remind users of its existence and therefore prevent another thread from popping up.

Note to self: Start thread entitled "DST (2019)" next March. 

[jeffandnicole]

While NJ is probably a more extreme example of most, it shows why states doing whatever they want to do simply won't work, and rather than provide the benefits some people loudly exclaim, the cons are easily going to make a mess of everyone's schedule in the state.

States currently can decide whether to observe DST or not.  Going to year-round DST wouldn't change that.

"What If"

[vdeane]

One of these posts made me think of something interesting: with the exception of Florida (which is largely driven by seniors and tourists), the major pushes for year-round DST come from places with solar noon before noon on standard time.  The places with solar noon at or after noon on standard time don't seem to be complaining as much (well, Florida, but it's Florida, so...).

I could see New England on AST with rest of EST remaining if CT (and maybe MA and VT too) were willing to split across time zones.  Southwestern CT would definitely want to stay where it is... maybe even western MA and most of VT because of the media markets.  But if the issue is NYC commuters (which would bring in the whole of the NEC, unless NJ could finally settle where the north/south Jersey line is), then having southwestern CT be a different time zone is the easiest answer.

https://i0.wp.com/www.edisonresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/blog209.jpg

My head is turning at the fact that apparently 53% of Americans wake up at 6:30 or earlier. If you had asked me to guess I would have figured the median to be at more like 7:30.

But then I guess it makes sense when you think about it - anyone who is in high school or has a child in high school will need to be waking up that early because of the absurd schedules high schools have. As will anyone who works at a high school. Or whose job involves serving commuters, or being in a retail establishment that opens before 9. Or who works in construction, which for whatever reason likes to start at 7 AM. Or who likes to go to the gym before work, or otherwise takes forever to get ready in the morning.

I can see it.  Have to be in at 8:30, commute takes 15-20 minutes, making/eating breakfast takes time, as does the whole shower/dry off/let hair air dry for 10 minutes for optimal drying/dry hair with hairdryer (can't move this to evening since I'd likely procrastinate, I feel hot afterwards and it would take too long to cool down before going to sleep, and I don't want to waste the one time I'm completely sweat-free on sleeping), as well as plucking my eyebrows.  If I could get away with "roll out of bed, brush teeth, get dressed, and head off to work" I could sleep in quite a bit more.

https://i0.wp.com/www.edisonresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/blog209.jpg

My head is turning at the fact that apparently 53% of Americans wake up at 6:30 or earlier. If you had asked me to guess I would have figured the median to be at more like 7:30.

But then I guess it makes sense when you think about it - anyone who is in high school or has a child in high school will need to be waking up that early because of the absurd schedules high schools have. As will anyone who works at a high school. Or whose job involves serving commuters, or being in a retail establishment that opens before 9. Or who works in construction, which for whatever reason likes to start at 7 AM. Or who likes to go to the gym before work, or otherwise takes forever to get ready in the morning.

Come on now.  High school schedules are not "absurd" - mine ran from 07:25 to 14:56 and made in dent to my sleep schedule whatsoever.  I liked going in and getting out at those times because, well, it wasn't nighttime when I got home and I could still do anything else I wanted to; even now my preferred working hours would be 07:00-15:00.

In elementary school from 3rd-5th grade my mom also worked the Before School program, which meant I had to be there at 06:30 every morning (sometimes 06:00 if her boss decided to play a little hooky, but this only happened a couple of times per year).  I got used to that time, but man, it was early!  I actually liked the luxury in middle and high school of not having to go in until 7-something and having some actual free time in the morning (because I was definitely not allowed to wake the whole house up at 04:00).

I started typing this post before 06:00 local time (I'm on Central).  Sue me.

I just refuse to wake up and go to work in darkness half the year, and have problems sleeping because it's too light out at night the other half.  It also amazes me that 17% of people sleep in until 08:00 or later on weekdays - sounds like either very much a night owl or delayed sleep phase syndrome to me.

So would y'all be okay with this set of sunrise/set times (assuming 35*N latitude)?

Your schedule sounds very larkish.  I couldn't even imagine holding a schedule like that.

And yes, studies have shown that most teenagers have owl tendencies.  I imagine your friends never complained to you because the response they'd get would probably have been the same as what they'd get from their parents.

While NJ is probably a more extreme example of most, it shows why states doing whatever they want to do simply won't work, and rather than provide the benefits some people loudly exclaim, the cons are easily going to make a mess of everyone's schedule in the state.

States currently can decide whether to observe DST or not.  Going to year-round DST wouldn't change that.

The fact that only Arizona, and Hawaii presently do suggests that it's a niche issues.  If we were to eliminate the clock changes, it would probably better to have a group composed of state officials to hammer out new time zone boundaries than to leave it willy-nilly to each individual state on their own.

[kalvado]

As I mentioned earlier, we cannot let every state decide for itself. If NJ says "none" and PA says "year-round", NJ will be one hour behind PA despite being due east. Many pairs of states could have this same problem.

Why is that a problem - any more of a problem than IN being 1 hour different from IL despite being right next to it?

IL is west of IN, so being an hour behind is not that unusual. However, NJ is east of PA. Going back an hour while traveling east would be a bit strange.

Also, let's say NJ says none and PA, NY & DE all say Year Round.  As there are many workers from Philly, NYC and Wilmington that live in NJ, not only would the hour time difference mess them up, but there'd be no such advantage to employees or employers.  Factor in the vast amount of daily travel between NJ and the surrounding states, and it'll be out-right confusing.  TV/Radio schedules would be screwed up as well, since all major stations in NJ are based in Philly or NYC.

While NJ is probably a more extreme example of most, it shows why states doing whatever they want to do simply won't work, and rather than provide the benefits some people loudly exclaim, the cons are easily going to make a mess of everyone's schedule in the state.

SO how Indiana and Illinois manage to get along with the problem?

I guess my example of 3 different major cities in 3 different states with millions of workers coming from a 4th state went right over your head, right?  Not to mention the vast amount of reverse commuting that takes place. 

Your example of just 2 states is normal along time zone lines.  Those examples also usually don't involve too many regular commuters. 

Even people driving thru would be affected, as NJ would be an island among states with different times, potentially with travelers needing to set their clocks twice, especially if they stop in the state.  In every other current example you can show, the clock change would just be once.

Simple solution: NJ does same thing as NY and PA. Humiliating for NJ, of course.
More difficult solution: install signs at state borders and train stations. Expensive. Doable.

More difficult situation: NY and PA choose to have different timings.
THen it may be a good idea to recognize that actual life is arranged more in terms of metropolitan areas than  states, and NYC area can be on a different time zone compared to any of adjacent states.  Or, if you will, NJ (most of it) goes with NYC, and Albany Buffalo and Boston do as they see fit. Which may be more difficult to manage, but same example of IN areas going along with Chicago prove it is doable...

[GaryV]

As I mentioned earlier, we cannot let every state decide for itself. If NJ says "none" and PA says "year-round", NJ will be one hour behind PA despite being due east. Many pairs of states could have this same problem.

Why is that a problem - any more of a problem than IN being 1 hour different from IL despite being right next to it?

IL is west of IN, so being an hour behind is not that unusual. However, NJ is east of PA. Going back an hour while traveling east would be a bit strange.

Most people don't know which way to set their clocks as they drive across time zone borders.  Add one?  Subtract one?

It's like most people not knowing that odd numbered Interstates and US highways are usually north-south.  Or that Windsor is south of Detroit.  It depends on the population.

[Duke87]

Come on now.  High school schedules are not "absurd" - mine ran from 07:25 to 14:56 and made in dent to my sleep schedule whatsoever.  I liked going in and getting out at those times because, well, it wasn't nighttime when I got home and I could still do anything else I wanted to; even now my preferred working hours would be 07:00-15:00.

Protip: never assume your experience is typical. Those studies showing we force teenagers to wake up earlier than their bodies naturally want to are real science. You may have been just fine and enjoyed waking up at the time required, but you are the exception, not the rule.

So would y'all be okay with this set of sunrise/set times (assuming 35*N latitude)?

Okay, WTF is even going on there. The given lat/lon places the location in Algeria, which is on GMT+1. But the sunrise/sunset times in the linked table are assuming GMT+4.

I think GMT+1 is a reasonable time zone for that location. That gives you sunrise range from 05:45-08:08 and sunset range from 17:47-20:17.

I can see it.  Have to be in at 8:30, commute takes 15-20 minutes, making/eating breakfast takes time, as does the whole shower/dry off/let hair air dry for 10 minutes for optimal drying/dry hair with hairdryer (can't move this to evening since I'd likely procrastinate, I feel hot afterwards and it would take too long to cool down before going to sleep, and I don't want to waste the one time I'm completely sweat-free on sleeping), as well as plucking my eyebrows.  If I could get away with "roll out of bed, brush teeth, get dressed, and head off to work" I could sleep in quite a bit more.

Yeah see this is where having a lengthy morning routine will get to you. When I have an office to go into it takes me roughly 30 minutes from getting out of bed to heading out the door. And that's with me moving slowly because I'm groggy first thing in the morning. If I'm not eating breakfast before leaving and am moving like I have to rush I can be out the door in under 10 minutes.

Of course this is with me having deliberately taken steps to minimize the required effort. For example, I have a full beard not as an aesthetic decision, but because this allows me to not spend 5-10 minutes in the morning shaving.

[tradephoric]

California Governor Jerry Brown signed Assembly Bill 807 today with the message "Fiat Lux!" (Let there be light.).  California voters will now vote on the ballot measure this November.

California voters will decide daylight saving time

California voters this November will decide whether to change daylight saving time, after Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill Thursday sending the proposal to the statewide ballot.

Wrote Brown in a signing message: "Fiat Lux!" (Let there be light.)

Assemblyman Kansen Chu, D-San Jose, who authored Assembly Bill 807, has called the practice of changing clocks twice a year, in the fall and the spring, "outdated." He argues altering the time by an hour has adverse health affects, increasing chances for heart attacks, workplace injuries and traffic accidents.

The ballot measure would overturn a 1949 voter-approved initiative called the Daylight Savings Time Act, which established Standard Pacific Time in California.

Should voters approve the ballot measure, the Legislature would then decide how the state's time should be set. Congress would have to sign off on Chu's main goal of establishing year-round daylight saving time.

https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article214002999.html

[tradephoric]

Florida has already passed a bill that would make Daylight Saving Time permanent and California is currently going through the process to pass similar legislation.  If a bill is passed to make Daylight Saving Time permanent in California it would likely force Congress to act on amending the Uniform Time Code of 1966 to make DST permanent throughout the country.  California and Florida (the 1st and 3rd most populous states respectively) account for 61 million people in this country and their voice would be strong if Congress eventually debates this issue.  In addition, there are plenty of other states that would favor year-round DST based on previous bills passed by their state legislators or current state practices.  Here's a full list of states that I believe would favor year-round DST along with their populations (which represents nearly 100 million Americans).  Arizona and Hawaii are included on this list because they would still likely opt out of DST just as they do today, but it doesn't hurt if the rest of the states change to year-round DST.  If anything it would make figuring out what time it is in surrounding states less confusing for the people of Arizona and vice versa.

California - 39,776,830
Florida - 21,312,211
Arizona - 7,123,898
Massachusetts - 6,895,917
South Carolina - 5,088,916
Alabama - 4,888,949
Connecticut - 3,588,683
Hawaii - 1,426,393
New Hampshire - 1,350,575
Maine - 1,341,582
Rhode Island - 1,061,712
Vermont - 623,960

[mrsman]

I would also include Indiana since historically they had year round standard time, so if given the option they might go back to that or year-round cental dst.


Nexus 5X

[tradephoric]

There was an op-ed piece in the LA times talking about the downside of year-round DST.  Some arguments against year-round DST were listed in the article....

Year-round daylight saving time? More dark mornings is just one downside
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-skelton-daylight-saving-time-20180705-story.html

But if we kept daylight saving all year, kids would be walking to school in the dark in winter. On Dec. 21, the sun wouldn't rise until 7:55 a.m. in L.A. That's uncivilized and dangerous.

While the sun would rise in LA on December 21st at 7:55AM, actual daylight would begin much earlier with dawn beginning at 7:26AM.  There is lots of research that exists that suggests later school times would be beneficial for school children and would help maximize children's potential to succeed.  You would think Californians would eat that research up, and favor later school start times for the sake of the children (but not even so much a mention of that research in this op-ed).  If school districts moved school start times back an hour, it would compensate for the later winter sunrises.  Also, on December 21st how many kids are actually walking to school?  December 21st usually line up with Christmas break and for a few weeks right around the winter solstice, when the days are the shortest, many children aren't going to school. 

On December 21st the sun rises in Ann Arbor, Michigan at 8:00AM, a full 5 minutes later than what the sun would rise in LA if the city was observing permanent DST.  Ann Arbor was listed as the best place to live in 2018 according to livability.com and has appeared on the top 100 best places to live list for 5 years in a row.  How could a city with such "uncivilized" sunrise times be considered the most livable city in America? 

"Permanent DST would likely lead to more pedestrian accidents on winter mornings as more adults and children venture out in darkness,"  Severin Borenstein, a professor at the UC Berkeley Haas School of Business, wrote in a recent blog.

This is a very similar to the "kids walking to school in dark" argument, just expanded to include all pedestrians.  But i would argue there are plenty more pedestrians walking around LA during the evening hours that would benefit from the later sunsets during the winter.   If there are more people out and about at around 6PM compared to 6AM, then later sunrises would be more beneficial and likely reduce the pedestrian accident rate.  Now there actually may be more total pedestrian deaths, because perhaps later sunsets would encourage people to be outside more, increasing the exposure of potential pedestrian accidents.  But as long as the pedestrians fatality rate goes down, that's a good thing.

The country went to daylight saving time in World War II to save energy. But there's no solid evidence it did or does today. People may turn their lights on later in the day, but they run their air conditioner longer.

For the months that Daylight Saving Time would be extended (November through March) the average high in LA doesn't exceed 73 degrees.  How many people put on their AC when the average high is only 73 degrees?  I doubt increased air-conditioning usage in LA during the winter would offset the reduced electricity lighting costs that would be saved by going to permanent DST.  There's almost no question that year-round DST would reduce energy consumption when compared to the current status quo. 

[formulanone]

Come on now.  High school schedules are not "absurd" - mine ran from 07:25 to 14:56 and made in dent to my sleep schedule whatsoever.  I liked going in and getting out at those times because, well, it wasn't nighttime when I got home and I could still do anything else I wanted to; even now my preferred working hours would be 07:00-15:00.

Protip: never assume your experience is typical. Those studies showing we force teenagers to wake up earlier than their bodies naturally want to are real science. You may have been just fine and enjoyed waking up at the time required, but you are the exception, not the rule.

I think that's shady science...teenagers like to resist anything outside the norm because they like to bend limits. They want to sleep in because institutions are inherently boring, they don't foresee/feel repercussions by staying up late, and enjoying their time doing anything that doesn't involve being told what to do, usually at the expense of a good night's rest. They'd go to bed early and wake up early if it pissed off enough parents, their friends all did it, and was deemed cool by Madison Avenue.

Of course I would have enjoyed six-hour school days, two-hour work days, an hour of homework/studying, and 2-3 hours a day with friends, two quality meals with family and associated chit-chat, and some free time to do whatever to make room for 9-10 hours of sleepytime. Not going to happen unless a lot of puzzle pieces are re-shaped for that kind of schedule.

On December 21st the sun rises in Ann Arbor, Michigan at 8:00AM, a full 5 minutes later than what the sun would rise in LA if the city was observing permanent DST.  Ann Arbor was listed as the best place to live in 2018 according to livability.com and has appeared on the top 100 best places to live list for 5 years in a row.  How could a city with such "uncivilized" sunrise times be considered the most livable city in America?

Not sure if serious or...wait, this thread has gone on for several months and 35 pages. You are serious...

[jakeroot]

Come on now.  High school schedules are not "absurd" - mine ran from 07:25 to 14:56 and made in dent to my sleep schedule whatsoever.  I liked going in and getting out at those times because, well, it wasn't nighttime when I got home and I could still do anything else I wanted to; even now my preferred working hours would be 07:00-15:00.

Protip: never assume your experience is typical. Those studies showing we force teenagers to wake up earlier than their bodies naturally want to are real science. You may have been just fine and enjoyed waking up at the time required, but you are the exception, not the rule.

I think that's shady science...teenagers like to resist anything outside the norm because they like to bend limits. They want to sleep in because institutions are inherently boring, they don't foresee/feel repercussions by staying up late, and enjoying their time doing anything that doesn't involve being told what to do, usually at the expense of a good night's rest. They'd go to bed early and wake up early if it pissed off enough parents, their friends all did it, and was deemed cool by Madison Avenue.

Of course I would have enjoyed six-hour school days, two-hour work days, an hour of homework/studying, and 2-3 hours a day with friends, two quality meals with family and associated chit-chat, and some free time to do whatever to make room for 9-10 hours of sleepytime. Not going to happen unless a lot of puzzle pieces are re-shaped for that kind of schedule.

I worked a job for four years, from 18-22, that usually required me to be at work by either 0500 or 0630. I never got used to it. It was always a struggle to get to bed and wake up early. I struggled to stay awake from about 1300-1600 (usually didn't nap), but then I'd be wide awake from 2100-2300. At best asleep by 2330. My coworkers had the same issue. Always a struggle to get to bed. Oddly enough, on the few occasions I didn't have to wake up until 0900 or so, I'd feel great, even if I only got six or seven hours sleep. For some reason, I just function better later in the morning, even on a small amount of sleep.

The "anarchist" argument is woefully out of touch. That doesn't personally describe anyone I know. Even the kids who seem like they grew up in a shitty household still post photos of them and their parents on FB and Instagram all the time. Teenagers bend the rules about as often as most parents I know. Which is to say, only when necessary and not because "fuck the man".

[formulanone]

The "anarchist" argument is woefully out of touch. That doesn't personally describe anyone I know. Even the kids who seem like they grew up in a shitty household still post photos of them and their parents on FB and Instagram all the time. Teenagers bend the rules about as often as most parents I know. Which is to say, only when necessary and not because "fuck the man".

Oh, I usually got 6-7 hours of sleep on most school nights. Sometimes I needed an alarm clock, sometimes not. Probably would have liked to get more sleep, but I was too busy reading, doing homework, playing...later on, working instead to going to be "on time". Didn't need coffee in the mornings like I do now! Maybe once or twice a year I needed to sleep late, deep into a Saturday morning.

"Anarchist" wasn't what I implied nor stated. And it's not that children/teenagers do it because they necessarily like to do the wrong thing; everyone's going to grow up differently than the next. But sometimes they have these motivations and pushes to do things that range from minor to major out of curiosity. It's natural for children, teenagers, and young adults to push limits; in a nutshell, that's how humans find their comfort zones.

[tradephoric]

On December 21st the sun rises in Ann Arbor, Michigan at 8:00AM, a full 5 minutes later than what the sun would rise in LA if the city was observing permanent DST.  Ann Arbor was listed as the best place to live in 2018 according to livability.com and has appeared on the top 100 best places to live list for 5 years in a row.  How could a city with such "uncivilized" sunrise times be considered the most livable city in America?

Not sure if serious or...wait, this thread has gone on for several months and 35 pages. You are serious...

Of course I'm being serious.  The LA Times editorial board gives some superficial arguments against year-round DST and say that sunrises at 7:55 a.m. in LA would be "˜uncivilized and dangerous'.  But why?   Yes the kids waiting for the bus in the morning would be more likely to be waiting in darkness if DST was made permanent, but that's only assuming the school start times throughout LA remain the same.  Have the buses shuttle the kids to school an hour later and shift more "˜after school' activities to "˜before school' activities.  The American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement in 2014 recommending that middle and high schools start class no earlier than 8:30 a.m. 

U.S. doctors urge later school start times for teens
The American Academy of Pediatrics just issued a new policy statement recommending that middle and high schools start class no earlier than 8:30 a.m. because adolescents have unique sleep rhythms that make it harder for them to go to sleep and wake up earlier than other people, and that sleep deprivation can affect academic achievement as well as cause other problems.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/08/25/u-s-doctors-urge-later-school-start-times-for-teens/?utm_term=.f862e708d641

Interestingly, state lawmakers in California are taking note of the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations.  Senate Bill 328 was introduced by Sen. Anthony Pontantino that would require middle and high schools across California to start the school day no earlier than 8:30 a.m.   Districts that have adopted the American Academy of Pediatrics policy have reported improved attendance rates, state exam and college admission scores, and grade-point averages.

What time should school start? No earlier than 8:30 a.m., lawmaker proposes
http://www.latimes.com/local/education/la-me-school-start-times-20170216-story.html

If school districts throughout the country began adhering to the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation for school start times, then the 'kids waiting in darkness' argument by those who wish to stay on standard time wouldn't be very strong.  To steal a word from the LA Times editorial board, it's "˜uncivilized' to have school start times before 8:30 a.m.

[tradephoric]

Interestingly, state lawmakers in California are taking note of the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations.  Senate Bill 328 was introduced by Sen. Anthony Pontantino that would require middle and high schools across California to start the school day no earlier than 8:30 a.m.

By the way Senate Bill 328 was passed by the California Senate which would require middle and high schools across California to start no earlier than 8:30 a.m.  It's amazing that the LA Times editorial about year-round DST wouldn't even mention Senate Bill 328, considering the "kids waiting in darkness at the bus-stop" has been one of the most common arguments against going to DST during the winter.

[formulanone]

Yeah, and getting off the school bus at quarter to 5 will also be terrible for morale. One of the best perks of being a kid was getting home before the adults!

All I see in this thread are over-complicated solutions to a minor annoyance.

[jakeroot]

The "anarchist" argument is woefully out of touch. That doesn't personally describe anyone I know. Even the kids who seem like they grew up in a shitty household still post photos of them and their parents on FB and Instagram all the time. Teenagers bend the rules about as often as most parents I know. Which is to say, only when necessary and not because "fuck the man".

Oh, I usually got 6-7 hours of sleep on most school nights. Sometimes I needed an alarm clock, sometimes not. Probably would have liked to get more sleep, but I was too busy reading, doing homework, playing...later on, working instead to going to be "on time". Didn't need coffee in the mornings like I do now! Maybe once or twice a year I needed to sleep late, deep into a Saturday morning.

"Anarchist" wasn't what I implied nor stated. And it's not that children/teenagers do it because they necessarily like to do the wrong thing; everyone's going to grow up differently than the next. But sometimes they have these motivations and pushes to do things that range from minor to major out of curiosity. It's natural for children, teenagers, and young adults to push limits; in a nutshell, that's how humans find their comfort zones.

Even now, working a night shift (home by 2200 though), I need an alarm to wake up. If not, I'll sleep until 1030 easy. Still though, if I set an alarm for 0930, I feel great, even if I went to bed at 0200. I would always try and get to bed by 2300 during my school and earlier work years, but it was nearly impossible.

I was assuming "anarchist" because you seemed to imply that kids like to do these things only to "bend limits"; a veritable middle-finger to society, as though their only motivation was because someone told them "no". It's just not like that anymore. I hear stories from my father about how rebellious and violent kids were in the 20th century. It's boggling. I just don't see that anymore. Yes, curiosity can sometimes come across the wrong way, but it's just a child's way of figuring things out. It's not meant to be seen as bending limits. We're just trying to figure things out like everyone else.

[tradephoric]

Yeah, and getting off the school bus at quarter to 5 will also be terrible for morale. One of the best perks of being a kid was getting home before the adults!

Don't worry kids can adapt.  Besides if schools have later start times businesses may adjust their times to start their workday later to be better aligned with the school schedules (so that employees can still drop/pick up their kids from school).  You can't see that happening?  I'm sure plenty of CEO's of Fortune 500 companies are parents themselves and there would be a natural progression to have later start times in businesses throughout the country.   If school districts are seriously considering later start times for their students (like California) now would be the perfect time to do it.  We are in an economy where there are more jobs than available workers to fill them, and workers have the bargaining power to demand for better benefits like flex hours and the like (so they can still pick up/drop off their kids on time).  After that, even if the economy tanks, the later working hours will suddenly become the norm.

All I see in this thread are over-complicated solutions to a minor annoyance.

Keeping the same time year-round is an over-complicated solution to changing the clocks twice a year?  Now you may think to yourself "ooh well how hard is it to change a clock"  but do you ever drive anywhere?  Without fail an agency fails to properly change the clocks at a traffic control device during the time change and a signal will get out of sync with the surrounding signals.  This can take weeks to address until enough people call in to complain that the signals are out of step.  It's well documented that there is an increase in crashes after time changes and mistimed and inefficient signal timings could factor into the increase in crashes.  The confusion arises when people have to change their clocks twice a year.

[vdeane]

Without fail an agency fails to properly change the clocks at a traffic control device during the time change and a signal will get out of sync with the surrounding signals.

Set all the signals to UTC and give the software the ability to recognize DST so that the switch can be flipped once centrally, not per-signal.  Also not an issue in places where signals are actuated.