|
I'm mainly posting, because I honestly can't believe that anyone would vote against the statements
that you are making. I think that you are absolutely correcting in all of the arguments that you are
making. But I would also like to and some more reasons. If you look to the states that abide by
daylight savings time, which is the east and west coast. You will see that the midwest doesn't have
to recognize DST, because the primary source of jobs within this region are farmers and it doesn't
affect their level of productivity.
But also the emergence of the profit motive continues to be the main criterion for showing progress
and success, which makes it easy for the goverment to want to increase our "productivity". |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
I don't think i understand the argument, since electricity and lights, productivity can go on 24/7.
Daylight savings wouldn't effect productivity...would it? I thought it was to conserve energy, by
reducing the need for lights. All the states follow daylight savings time except Arizona, as far as
business hours. I guess Arizona isn't concerned about conserving energy. I do agree that the gov't
loves to regulate, and re-regulate, and over regulate. But i don't think daylight savings time is a
good example of it. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
There are other rationales used; when Franklin first thought of the idea, it was to save on candle
wax (which could get pretty expensive).
I certainly wouldn't want the government intervening in every situation, but I think the reasoning
behind most intervention is economic. While productivity does influence economics, there are tons
of other factors that the government must consider before intervening. |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
11 Mar 2008 01:35
Sign In
For and Against Recent Activity
