The Myth of Daylight Saving Time
Well, we are about to set all our clocks ahead one hour this coming weekend. As usual, I scratch my head to try and figure out why in the world we do that. Time and the keeping of time is a nebulous pursuit and what everyone thinks is the “actual” time is really just a fantasy.
I came to this conclusion when I did a little research on time and came up with some interesting information on how it has been perceived—and calculated—throughout history.
Here is what I found:
- Folklore has it that clocks were dangerous, and that 2 clocks ticking in the same room could bring “sure death.”
- In 1663, Massachusetts passed a law that made wasting time a crime. This created a demand for clocks, but the only ones available were expensive imports. It would be another century before America made clocks.
- By the mid-19th century, time (or the telling of it) became much more important, and each city set its own standard time according to “solar noon.” That meant when it was 12:00 noon in Chicago, it was 11:50 am in St. Louis, and 12:18 pm in Detroit.
- However, a problem arose as America’s railroad system was developed because train schedules were forced to follow the “solar noon” time of the cities. To solve this problem, in 1883 the railroads broke up the country into 4 different time “zones.”
- That meant that in order to work with the new train schedules, Chicagoans had to move their clocks back 9 minutes and 32 seconds. Louisville had to set theirs back almost 18 minutes—but the folks in Bangor Maine passed a referendum in 1884 (by a 3 to 1 margin) to oppose a 25-minute change to their clocks.
- Interestingly, the time zones set by the railroads in 1883 are the same time zones we have today. If you look at a time zone map of the U.S., you see where the land is flat the time zone is very wide (trains travel faster over the plains) and where mountains had to be climbed or avoided, the time zone is narrow. (The Pacific zone in Oregon is not even as wide as the state—due to the rugged Cascade Mountains.)
- Daylight saving time was first adopted in the U.S. during the First World War, and then it was rejected right after the war ended. It wasn’t used again until February 3, 1942 when “war time” (daylight saving time) was instituted, and then lasted without change until September 30, 1945.
- Daylight saving time is not (and never has been) consistent. Clock changes for daylight saving time in countries around the world have been made for 20 minutes, 30 minutes, 40 minutes, 60 minutes, and 120 minutes. Of course many countries do not change their clocks at all. So, why do we select 60 minutes in the U.S.? No one seems to know.
- Of course, the state of Arizona does not observe daylight saving time at all…at least most of it doesn’t.
- Canada has 6 major time zones, and their daylight saving time matches the dates of the U.S. schedule—although in the far North where it is sunny almost around the clock in the summer, I’m not sure why they bother at all.
- Mexico has their own daylight saving plan—except in the North where the towns usually follow the U.S. time zones (which means that Mexico uses two separate systems).
- Egypt used to change their clocks 4 times per year, because of Ramadan. The new transitional government abolished daylight saving time on April 25, 2011.
- Iraq’s Council of Ministers abolished daylight saving time in Iraq in 2008.
- Russia eliminated 2 entire time zones in March of 2010, and has made daylight saving time permanent as of autumn of 2011. No more clock changes in Russia. (What do they know that we don’t?)
- What about the Southern hemisphere? Shortly after the U.S. moves their clocks ahead in Spring, Southern hemisphere countries normally move their clocks back one hour—making a two-hour gap for part of the year. Sometimes, because of the dates of change, there is no extra gap at all.
- I remember seeing a news clip on the evening news, during the last “changing of time,” which showed a row of employees in a jewelry store standing at a counter changing the time on all their watches for sale. Can you imagine how much wasted productivity daylight saving time causes—just fiddling with clocks?
- Apparently, it is not really the hours of daylight or darkness that matters—it seems to be the concept of “change” that drives daylight saving time. After all, when it is dark in Spokane WA, it is still sunny in Los Angeles—both in the same time zone. So, should we change our clocks for the benefit of Spokane, or for Los Angeles?
- Then, of course, every 4 years we throw in an extra 24 hours for good measure (or should it be a bit more, or a bit less than the somewhat arbitrary 24 hours).
- More and more studies are coming to light about: adverse effects of time changes on our health; increases in accidents (especially on-the-job accidents); increases in cost of energy; increases in suicide, and on and on.
As far as I can determine, every plausible reason for having daylight saving time has been struck down by thorough scientific studies.
Frankly, I don’t care what standards are selected for time zones—I just wish they would pick one and stick with it. Maybe Russia, Iraq, Egypt, Arizona and (whomever) has the right idea.
In the meantime, we’ll follow the dictates of our leaders in Washington, because they obviously know what is “right” for the rest of us—as I discussed once a few years ago when we changed back from daylight saving time.
With the constant changing of clocks and times around the world—I wonder if anyone really knows what time it is?
Tell me what you think about changing all your clocks and watches twice a year. Does Daylight Saving Time benefit you?
*
Business Credit Cards At Risk
A large majority of small businesses have credit cards issued in the name of the business. According to the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), 85% of small businesses have at least one card issued to the business. A recent report by the SBA, indicates that business credit cards represent about 70% of small-business lending by banks.
Moreover, a poll by the National Small Business Association (NSBA) indicated that credit cards are the top source of small-business capital.
That is why it is very timely that the Credit Card Act passed by the current session of Congress came along when it did…right?…WRONG!
It seems the new Credit Card Act conveniently excludes credit cards used for business. This means that credit card companies are free to have their way with small businesses that use their cards. Small business is still prey to the predators of big banks and finance companies.
In fact, in the same poll by the NSBA, 75% of respondents said they had been hit with higher interest rates; 60% said they had received their bills after the due date, and 15% said they had their cards cancelled for no reason, and without explanation.
A small-business owner could use their personal credit cards…except that transfers the liability from the business to the owner—and heaven help you if the IRS ever audits you. It is always recommended to not comingle business and personal expenses.
So, once again, our illustrious members of Congress have stuck it to small business—the very group of businesses that were supposed to bring this country out of recession. Yet, it seems like every time a small-business owner turns around they are being hit with higher fees, unknown additional costs for healthcare, threatened increases in taxes (expiration of tax cuts—or worse), and hidden extra costs like this exclusion from the Credit Card Act.
And everyone wonders why small business is so slow to spend money on hiring people and increasing capacity. Good Grief!
Am I the only one that is concerned about the future of small business?
*
Small Business Hit With Regulatory Costs
On the eve of the newly passed small business assistance bill (TARPll?), the Office of Advocacy of the SBA released a new report on the impact of government regulations on small business. The timing is somewhat ironic in that the report discusses the onerous cost demands being forced on small business–while the new bill offers to cut taxes…taxes on what; I’m not sure.
Just for a benchmark, this new report tells us that the cost of federal regulations for all businesses has increased to $1.75 TRILLION per year, as of 2008. That number breaks down to $7,755 per employee for large firms (500 or more employees) and $10,585 per employee for small firms (fewer than 20 employees). That is a 36% difference.
Interestingly, it appears from the report that a good portion of this cost is for paperwork required by various federal regulations (and bureaucracies). For many of the regulations there is no differentiation between small firms (fewer than 20 employees) and large firms (over 500 employees). They all have to adhere to the same reporting requirements.
It just seems to me that in the face of our current economy, the bill that was just passed totally missed the boat if the intent was to get small business going in order to improve the economy. Passing a bill to reduce some of the paperwork demanded by federal regulations would have accomplished much more.
In addition, are there any small businesses out there that are not concerned about the cost of the upcoming implementation of the new healthcare reform law in 2014?
Is it any wonder that entrepreneurship in the U.S. is falling behind the rest of the world? Or, does anyone even care?
*
Labor Statistics for July…Surprise!
Well, the labor statistics for July have been released, and there seems to be some surprise in Washington that employment dropped by a net 131,000 people in July. There was also little mention that the newly unemployed number for June was “revised” downward by another 100,000.
However, the “official” unemployment rate of 9.5% remained unchanged. It always amazes me how so many jobs can be lost each month while the unemployment rate improves or remains unchanged. Of course the numbers are “seasonally adjusted.” I doubt that anyone knows what the formula is for seasonally adjusting the numbers, so I always stick with actual numbers.
Which, by the way, are much more representative of reality when we look at the Bureau of Labor Statistics U-6 numbers instead of the U-3 numbers. U-6 includes all unemployed people whether they said they looked for a job in the last 4 weeks or not. The U-6 number puts the unemployment rate at 16.8%.
But, don’t forget, this still does not include those people who did not report that they looked for work during the past 12 months; those who would like to enter the workforce but cannot find a job (new graduates and new immigrants); and those who do not report looking for work because they are in the country illegally. Some studies have put the real number of unemployed closer to 30%. Detroit has reported their actual unemployment rate at around 50%.
The point is; that Washington needs to quit their petty political bickering and get busy working on free enterprise job creation by supporting new businesses, new R&D, new expansions, new capital resources…and stop regulating and taxing businesses—and jobs—into oblivion.
*
It’s Got to Stop
Steve Wynn is the most active and successful real estate and Casino operator in Las Vegas. He is concerned about the direction Washington is headed in and how it will affect businesses across the country. Part of his personal solution is to redirect his interests (and money) outside the U.S. Watch an interview he did with CNBC a few weeks ago…if you’re a business person you will find it interesting:
Is Wynn full of it…or is he right when he says “It’s got to stop.”
*
Term Limits
I recently ran across a short mention of something we have heard little about in the mainstream media lately–term limits. A bill was introduced a while back by Senator Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) that would reduce term limits. This is something that must be done before there will ever be any real change or progress coming out of Washington.
Senator DeMint’s amendment would limit House members to three terms and senators to two terms. Every lawmaker then could serve no longer than six years in Congress.
“Americans know real change in Washington will never happen until we end the era of permanent politicians,” said DeMint in a statement. “As long as members have the chance to spend their lives in Washington, their interests will always skew toward…amassing their own power.”
Two thirds of the House and Senate as well as three quarters of the states would need to vote for DeMint’s amendment for it to become a part of the Constitution.
Does anyone think this amendment will ever be taken seriously in the foreseeable future?
*
My Book
Any business crisis can be managed before it becomes fatal . . . Be Your Own Turnaround Manager tells you how. Click here for more information.