Greg, you need an overhaul

This is quite interesting. if one that is not taken particularly seriously. Past suggestions to reform the Gregorian calendar have all failed in the face of tradition, convenience and apathy. Three of the most common proposals for reform are as follows:

1.The World Calendar is based on a 52-week, 364-day year, starting on Sunday, January 1st; the 365th day has no day of the week and is called ‘Year-End Day’; and in leap years a Leap-Year Day is inserted between June and July. January, April, July and October all have 31 days, and the rest 30.

2.The International Fixed Calendar divides the year into 13 months of 28 days each, with the 365th day (‘Year Day’) outside the months, and a Leap Day after June 28th in leap years. All months begin on Sundays, and the new, seventh month is known as Sol.

3.The Perpetual Calendar has four 3-month quarters, each beginning on a Monday. Like the previous two, an extra Year-End Day and Leap-Year Day are inserted.

The Gregorian Calendar has 12 months of different length (with no month being 1/12 of the year), uneven half- and quarter-years, and no standard first day of the year or of any month.

This makes financial planning in particular difficult, and public holidays are irregular. Some companies, such as Kodak, use the International Fixed Calendar to pay their employees; others work on the basis of thirteen months and give the last month’s pay as a Christmas bonus.

If and when you have the time, you will notice that the Gregorian Calendar is fixed on the starting date of 1 A.D., which has significance only for Christians as the supposed date of Christ’s birth.

Even the Christians are not united. some of the Eastern Orthodox Churches skipped the first 13days of October 1923. A standard calendar for all religions and countries makes much more sense, fixed on a starting point in history with significance for all people.

The calendar has been successfully reformed in the past. the Gregorian Calendar was only devised in 1582 (by Pope Gregory XIII). There would be a cost in reforming again, but this would be offset in the long-term by the savings due to simplification.