Slashdot Mirror
Leaving Early May Cost You Time
markmcb writes "OmniNerd has an interesting traffic article demonstrating how leaving early for work may cost you time. Brandon Hansen uses a year's worth of data collected on his urban drive to and from work along with statistical analysis to show the effects of varying departure times and considering external factors like nearby school districts' schedules. In the end, a minor shift in his departure time results in saving driving hours equivalent to over a third of the vacation time given annually by his employer."
It doesn't really matter if you leave work earlier or later, as long as you leave slightly different from the rest of the pack, the road will most likely be empty.
However, your employer will always notice if you leave early, so the idea situation is to leave late.
Please stop entering code 2,2,7,6,6,4
i'm moving to a new job next month. one of the primary considerations i put into housing, was to be as close as possible to work. commuting sucks. we are moving into a smaller place but i figure i could get as much as an hour or two a day more in time with my family. (and the smaller housing is forcing us to get rid of a bunch of junk and simplify)
with the price of fuel and maintenance, and time with kids that wont be kids long, it was worth it to really make an effort.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
No joke. The holiday situation in the U.S. is deplorable compared to the rest of the so-called Western World. If you worked at a low-paying job, like a fast food franchise, you might be lucky to get those 80 hours.
A lot of Europeans complain that Americans are sheltered and don't know anything about the rest of the world. And why should we? We're hard pressed to find any time to travel. If you travel for just one week out of an entire year, that leaves you with just five available vacation days to plan for friends' weddings, a visit from family, a camping trip, etc.
Most of us burn our sick days for short-term time off like that, but that's hardly a good solution. Oh wait -- you have heard about the American healthcare system, haven't you?
Companies in the U.S. are fond of management philosophies that emphasize effective "human capital management." Say that ten times fast. Sounds a lot like "human cattle management," doesn't it? Coincidence?
Breakfast served all day!
the *real* solution is not to drive at all. I know this will make me sound like an unpatriotic communist, but (disclaimer - I live in a relatively small Australian city of about 1 million poeple) I can definitely commute much faster in rush hour traffic than I can in a car. I get to work in about 1/2 the time of driving, and about 1/3 the time of public transport. Cycling's very cheap, and it turns an otherwise stressful time into a pleasant experience. And it gives exercise!! What a deal!! :-)
The other plus, is that finding parking for a bicycle is always easy. No more hunting/paying for car parking. My fiance and I both cycle, and this means that we only run one car. A big economic saving. I highly recommend it.
Maybe a 38% boost in vacation time by saving several minutes a day commuting but try to feel the effect of your extra five six minutes a day. It's too short and gets lost in the day. You're going to cause youself more frustration fretting over your six min./day savings especially if the statistics start shifing, which of course will cause you stress and health problems and you'll die that much sooner. Forget about it. Instead start thinking about REAL vacation time. E.g. How can I get an extra week of minutes successfully off this year ...
Yeah, I like to come in for 7am. Unbelievable how much better it is to have a quiet work environment for a couple of hours before everyone else appears around 9am.
I hate cubes.
-- "It's not stalking if you're married!" My Wife.
I used to have a 3 hour (each way) commute from San Jose to San Rafael (north of San Fransisco). I was on the night shift, but that happened to have me leave at the "going home" rush hours and coming back a bit before the "leaving home" rush hours.
I first started by avoiding the city entirely... hitting 237 to 880 and up. But the milpitas junction was always such a crawl that it took far longer than just driving through the city. Then I took 101 up, which would slow to a predictable crawl and take a very long time. Then I started taking the secret route: 280 up through the foothills. Speeds are always in the 90's and there is never a jam unless someone flipped their porche. It still dumps you out in the city, but you avoid the 101 SF traffic jam.
Going back, that route is a nightmare of drunk drivers and morning traffic. Ironically, coming up 580 to 880 to 237 gets you in at ludicrous speeds... I've been going 110 and getting passed by cops on a fully empty 5-lane road.
A three hour commute chopped down to just one hour by judicious exploration of possible routes.
The same has been true in Boston. I used to drive my girlfriend to work from Porter Square to the Cambridgeside Galleria. After experimenting with Mass Ave, Memorial Drive, and a few other routes, it became clear that the fastest way to get there was by taking Somerville to McGrath Highway... both underutilized throughfares that nobody needs to commute on in the morning. A 1 hour commute chopped down to 1/2 hour.
I guess what I'm saying is experiment with your drive. Every place I've lived, from Boston to LA to the silicon valley, has had alternate routes that (once discovered) chopped commute time down tremendously.
The ______ Agenda
I had it worse. If I showed up late, people would notice me coming in late. Come in early, people would notice me leaving early. If I came in on time, I'd never get any damn work done.
So how's the weather in fantasy-land?
Let's see:
US has highest health care costs in the world, yet quality is not among the top 20 industrialized countries. (CNN...YESTERDAY!) Life expectancy trails a similar number of the same countries and even Cuba!
US does have among the highest production per worker, but NOT per worker per hour. Diminishing returns and all that. (Economist 11/05)
US vacation time and real compensation have been shrinking since the 60s with a few temporary exceptions.
Retirement age continues to increase, while retirement benefits decrease.
Minimum wages have not been raised in more than a decade (check how many times congress has voted themselves raises in the same period....)
Have you read a single article about the French riots? The issue centers on the fact that the revised labor laws basically allow the majority of young workers to basically be fired without cause up to age 27 anytime somebody younger (=cheaper) comes along.
"Most people in the US don't believe in the government coming in and telling everyone how to run their business." BWAAAAAAHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAA!!! Stop it, you're killing me!
I don't understand the mentality that says working a bit less and enjoying more vacation and retirement are bad things. Do you really have that little meaning in your life outside of the office? I'm truly sorry if you do.
With every passing decade, capitalism looks more and more like slavery, and I NEVER thought I would say that.
Exactly. That's the real problem in the US -- people buy debt faster than Big Macs. Debt is okay to some extent, but it should always be paid off as soon as possible. And really, when you think about it, it's much more satisfying to look back and say "Man, I have my house paid off after only 10 years," than "Remember that new TV we bought 10 years ago, and all those DVDs, and those new rims.. Damn.. they ain't spinnin' no mo!" That's why there will always be poor people; because some people will always be lured into buying comsumables and depreciable assets, racking up debt, etc. It doesn't take much to save serious money on debts either. Pay half your monthly mortgage payment every 2 weeks instead of the full payment once a month and you'll shave 6 years off a 30 year mortgage, and save almost $70k in interest on a $200k mortgage. Throw an extra $100 at the principle instead of buying new shoes and it'll be paid even sooner. Same thing for car payments, credit cards, etc.
Um.
Wow.
You TOTALLY missed the point.
The "poor people" you're talking about... I don't know how to break this to you, but they don't HAVE 200k mortgages. They tend to not even own. (Since owning takes capital.) They don't HAVE DVDs. They can afford the INTEREST on their loans, if they're lucky. And where do they get these loans? It's not from flat panel TV purchases. It's from things like medical problems when you don't have insurance. Whoops, you got sick? That's gonna cost you. And of course, it will cost you even more, since if you don't have insurance, you don't go in unless it's REALLY BAD (since you know it will cost you) so preventative medicine doesn't really happen much...
The problem isn't that "poor people don't know how to save". The problem is that the people that set the minimum wage don't seem to think that working at a job full time should at least earn you enough money to purchase both food AND shelter.
Step away from your OWN flat panel TV and DVD rack long enough to go look outside your window for a moment. See that? That's the "real world". And it extends a bit beyond the middle-class suburban skyline that no doubt graces your view.
The view "Poor people are there because they are lazy/don't want to work/lack motivation/can't plan well" is almost always exclusively found in.. wait for it... people who AREN'T POOR. Try it yourself sometime before you make broad, sweeping, generalizations.
I carpool to and from work about 20 miles each way. Interestingly, my non-scientific observation of our commute times and what affects it matches pretty closely with the linked article:
1) Friday mornings are usually pretty smooth. Mondays are often smooth too.
2) Evenings are always terrible. It doesn't matter the day of the week, they're just consistently awful.
3) Days/weeks without school are lighter.
4) Leaving at 8:40 gives a pretty consistent 30 minute commute. Leaving an hour earlier guarantees bad traffic.
The author did miss one key point though, which I call the Nielson Law of Traffic Dynamics (named for my carpool buddy who discovered it):
Traffic on the evening of October 31st is unquestionably always the worst traffic of the year, every year.
Every year we forget about this law, and every year we curse the thousands of parents who *have* *to* *be* *home* *before* *sunset*.
Neil
We are not slaves to capitalism. We are slaves to greed. We are one of the most overworked nations in the world. It is not so much that our employers or our government are demanding this from us. It is that we demand it from ourselves. We want that new boat. We want that bigger house. We want that bigger/better car -- and it better be new! We want that new entertainment center. We want that new computer/flat panel monitor/video card. We want the lifestyle we see our parents having, but instead of working and saving for it over a lifetime, we want it now. We are so driven by our desire for more stuff that we have become enslaved to it -- even to the point of racking up personal debt we can never hope to pay off. It drives every moment of everyday of our lives.
As we scurry around trying to get more stuff, we are missing the very moments and those important relationships that make life on this planet have any meaning. When was the last time you invited someone over for dinner just to hang out? When was the last time you were invited for dinner? When was the last time you visited your neighbor? When was the last time you actually sat down and did nothing but watch a sunrise? Or looked at the stars?
Purhaps this is the inevitable result of capitalism. It relies upon our own greed to drive us to work and succeed, but it also gives us the freedom to make our lives the way we want to. But when one is given greater freedom, one is given greater responsibility. No one is forcing us to work overtime (you have the freedom to pursue another job/career). No one is forcing us to go into debt so we have to work more(you can always say no to that new luxury). While there are exceptions to this (victims of disasters, diseases, etc.), I think most of us would agree that we have placed a lot of our burdens upon ourselves. We don't really need a newer car. We don't really need a bigger house. We don't really need and 60 inch DLP HDTV flat panel television set. We don't really need a new computer (let's face it, a Pentium III will still run most of today's software and it would be better to spend quality time with family and friends than another few hours playing the latest FPS). We buy these things not because we need them, but because we want them. And we overwork ourselves to get them or to pay off the debt we accrued while buying them.
We are the ones who allowed "the system" to destroy us. We are the ones who fell hook-line-and-sinker for the marketing pitches and hype -- who believed in our hearts that newer is always better. We are the ones who felt that we just had to keep with the Joneses or we would -- what? Have less stuff? We have no one to blame but ourselves.
I believe in de-evolution. God made the world perfect, man fell, and its been going downhill ever since!