Dear Jim, Greg, and All,
I have added to Jim's remarks.
on 2001-02-20 02.25, James R. Frysinger at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> More and more I am seeing the hectare used by U.S. government agencies
> that deal with land management issues and environmental issues. That
> feels nice!
>
> I suspect that the reason for small and medium businesses to be more
> opposed to metric units is due to two reasons. They are less likely than
> large businesses to be involved in foreign trade and they are less
> likely to have the staff to deal with training new workers. This is from
> the U.S. perspective, of course.
>
> Jim
>
And small and medium businesses have developed a dislike for any (all)
government initiatives.
Often small businesses feel beset by government actions, such as income
taxes, sales taxes, city taxes, water rates, environmental regulations,
labor regulations, and so on, and on, and on.
When small businesses hear the words, 'I'm from the government and I'm here
to help you' they have a certain tendency to cringe and to try to avoid the
governments latest, additional, demands on their time and resources.
For many government initiatives this isn't a bad tactic as there is every
possibility that the government requirement will be abolished after the next
election or whenever the next change of government takes place. How many
people have died for laws that didn't last for ten years?
I suspect that metrication is often seen by small businesses in this context
as yet another government impost that may or may not be lasting.
Cheers,
Pat Naughtin CAMS
Geelong, Australia
> Gregory Peterson wrote:
>>
>> The hectare is used regularly in Canada to express the area of forested land
>> (used by paper and lumber companies, forest fire sizes, etc.), whereas the
>> acre is still exclusively used to express the area of farm land, commercial
>> property, and residential property. (aside: What is it about small and medium
>> sized businesses that make them so opposed to metric??)
> ....
