Yesterday my wife and kid were trying to go for a walk in the neighborhood before the light ended and the sun set. My work expects me to be callable until 5. I sent them out without me at 4, the sun sets here around 4:30. I never left the house. I would pay actual money to get that hour back and be on DST year round.

I would be interested to see if the split of opinion on this has to do with early risers/night owl orientation primarily, for me more light earlier has almost no value, but light at the end of the work day is worth a lot.

> for me more light earlier has almost no value, but light at the end of the work day is worth a lot.

I agree with this, but why wouldn't we stay on standard time and just all switch to starting school and work an hour earlier?

It would achieve the same thing as permanent DST except it would also preserve the property of our time system that midnight and noon are the times that the sun is lowest and highest in the sky.

Changing time is less expensive than billions of schedules. Noon at solar noon is already broken for so many people, I'm not sure it matters if its off a little more. I do find both equally arbitrary though.

> Who cares what the clock says?

People whose schedules are dictated by another entity, such as a school or employer.

School / work / other obligations start at a time that would prevent people from sleeping an extra hour.