First, who actually goes to banks in person any more? Second, I can think of half a dozen business local to me that currently don't have the same closing times already. So your argument falls flat.

I never said anything about either ratio or geography. Are you replying to the right person? Regardless, again, the alternative solution is to adjust hours, not clocks. If you arrive at and leave work or school an hour later in the summer, it has the same effect as DST.

First, I'm not promoting standard time. Personally, I'd prefer DST all year. But that's irrelevant except to point out that you shouldn't make assumptions. Second, your "problem" can be solved easily by having "core hours" for businesses that need to deal with others. But there are plenty of business that could set their hours however they please.

The best solution I heard was to switch to permanent standard time, but businesses and local governments would be (and always were) free to have "summer hours" (where hours of operation shift back one hour, the opposite of the way we currently shift clocks) and "winter hours." So instead of forcibly making everyone change their clocks, give them the choice to change their hours.

Low-voltage wiring or fiber optic cabling doesn't require permits or inspections. I haven't read the text of the bill, but there might be a provision that the landlord must make reasonable allowances for independent internet installation.

Socialism with American Characteristics

Iowa's rolling farm fields of coffee

Mac on the other hand are for coders that havn't [sic] learned linux yet, ...

I used Linux and Solaris for many years, but then MacOS X came out and I switched since it's a BSD-ish environment and all normal Unix software compiles and runs just fine on it. I'd much rather focus on actually coding than doing sys-admin stuff. I gladly let Apple take care of that.

Indeed, I fully agree. The funny thing is, monthly numbers would help us move away from the distortions of the quarterly cycle. If key data reporting becomes frequent enough, you can't get into a cycle of "do adverse-numbers stuff early in the quarter and then cram positive-numbers stuff into the end of the quarter". You have to - *gasp* - just run your business normally.

Some businesses could still manage to switch to a monthly cycle, but anyone who deals significantly in transoceanic feedstocks/parts/goods shipments won't be able to.

BLS numbers aren't some sort of dark art. They're literally just the compiled numbers reported by companies. Numbers are what they are. To fight against jobs numbers is to fight against reality.

People get confused by the existence of revisions. The problem is that not all data gets reported in a timely manner. When late data comes in, it causes revisions to the earlier reported numbers, either up or down.

Firing the head of the BLS because you don't like what numbers US companies reported is just insane Banana Republic-level nonsense.

Yes, he fired the same person who was ultimately responsible for putting out crap numbers.

US reporting has always been the gold standard. Nobody has accused the BLS of "crap numbers" until Trump decided he didn't like them. It's is so way outside the norms it doesn't even resemble something that could conceivably happen in the US; this is banana republic-level stuff.

Yeah, as an investor, my reaction to this proposal was, oh HELL no.

TL / DR:

BLS chief: "Jobs are turning bad now."

Trump: "Fake news, you're fired. I'm appointing a January 6th rioter conspiracy theorist to head the BLS!"

BLS today: "Jobs were ALREADY bad!"

The fact that you take at face value a revision of Biden-era job numbers, immediately after Trump fired and replaced the BLS chief explicitly because he published jobs numbers Trump didn't like, is....

Well, it's certainly a choice.

I was thinking the same thing. What sort of an idiot will take US jobs numbers at face value right after Trump fired the Bureau of Labor Statistics chief after he reported numbers that Trump didn't like?