Yeah, right... And then afterwards many American folks would... "look" surprised when
they find out or experience why a significant number of people and countries "out
there" look at the USA with a lot of... distrust/resentment, to say the least! On the
other hand, history has been proving over and over again what kind of result emerges
when... "empires" behave in such a fashion... Unfortunately though, noone can tell
*when* that expected... fall would take place... (in any case I don't think it will
happen in my lifetime...)
Marcus
On Thu, 23 Nov 2000 10:04:11 kilopascal wrote:
>2000-11-23
>
>Even though this sounds like a good idea, I doubt the US will ever adopt it.
>For one reason, it is a foreign idea. No matter how flawed an American
>method might be, it is perceived to be better than anything foreign.
>Imperial/pre-imperial units are not perceived as foreign. They are the
>units the founding fathers used. Even if they came over on the Mayflower,
>they are still seen as American, because they were used by Americans from
>day one. SI is foreign, because it is something we would have to change
>over to. And worst of all, it was not an American idea.
>
>Once a method or system is established in this country it is very hard to
>change it. Changing it means it was wrong from the beginning; that it was
>flawed. And if one part of an American method is flawed, others parts might
>be too. We would have a domino effect. This country prides itself in being
>consistent and stable for over 200 years. This may sound arrogant, but I
>don't think Americans care. They feel superior to all and want it to stay
>that way.
>
>Being different than everyone else and/or doing things in a less efficient
>way is not a concern to most. What is important is that the good old US of
>A sticks out as being the best for all to see and admire.
>
>In addition to SI, money is another issue. We mint dollar coins and print
>two dollar bills, but they are rarely used. Using them would be like saying
>we were wrong for not having them a long time ago. And arguing in their
>favor based on the fact that others have them is even more reason to reject
>them. Even when we come up with new money, we don't immediately pull the
>old stuff from circulation. We let it gradually wear out. Pulling it from
>circulation before it wears out is like saying American money has no value,
>and that would be a blow to our ego.
>
>Nothing must place into doubt who and what America is. America may not be
>perfect, but pretty damn close to it.
>
>So, as you see change is an uphill battle.
>
>John
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Bill Potts
> Sent: Tuesday, 2000-11-21 02:14
> To: U.S. Metric Association
> Subject: [USMA:9281] Re: US metric and integers -- OFF TOPIC
>
>
> A helluva good idea, Joe.
>
> Maybe the current fiasco will lead to some revisions in that direction,
> although it might possibly require a Constitutional Amendment. (I
> don't have
> time to read through it at the moment, so I don't know for sure.)
>
> Bill Potts, CMS
> San Jose, CA
> http://metric1.org [SI Navigator]
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> > Behalf Of Joseph B. Reid
> > Sent: November 20, 2000 17:54
> > To: U.S. Metric Association
> > Subject: [USMA:9276] Re: US metric and integers
> >
> >
> > Bill Potts wrote in USMA 9272:
> >
> > >Scott Clauss wrote:
> > >> I suspect this is why other countries have run off elections.
> > >
> > >Which is really the only fair way to deal with a mere plurality.
> > That way,
> > >there is no such thing as a spoiler.
> > >
> > >If run-offs were the normal practice here, Nader could have got his 5%
> > >without affecting the outcome for the other two.
> >
> >
> > I might add that the same result would be obtained in one election using
> > the Australian system of single transferable vote, in which the
> > voter marks
> > his preferences by 1, 2, 3, etc. It was introduced in Queensland in the
> > 19th century and is now used in all electios throughout Australia to the
> > lower houses of parliament.
> >
> >
>
>
>
Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com
