It seems to me that several of the arguments used against DST work against the whole concept of standard time.
Why would New York need to set the clock differently from the clock in California? "If people want to get up earlier to take advantage of the sunlight, they can do that without the government telling them to reset their clock" is as good an argument against different time zones as it is against DST. Indeed, why not a global time zone? Wink wink. On the concept of having DST all year round: in May 1940, The Netherlands were put on Berlin time. That, plus the yearly switch to DST (introduced in 1916), meant that the clocks were set forward one hour and forty minutes. The change back to "standard" (Berlin) in autumn was postponed "until further notice", and we wound up with DST for two-and-a-half years. When the war ended, the Dutch abolished DST, evidently fed up with it. However, in 1977 DST was introduced again, and we still have it. 1916 was, I believe, also the year in which the United States adopted "Daylight saving and standard war time". In "times of national emergencies", DST would be kept all year 'round. I think Roosevelt instituted year-round Daylight Saving Time, called "War Time," from February 1942 to September 1945.
--------------------------------------------------- https://lists.uni-koeln.de/mailman/listinfo/sundial
