I wish I had read this message over the week-end to have enough time to comment. With the apology that my thoughts may be erratic I will attempt to say: 1: For one, I am glad that there is someone else that feels in the same lines I expressed my feelings some two weeks ago. I believe that Paul's comments are accurate and true. I had mentioned something about the over-self-confidence which falls in the same lines with Paul's depression idea. 2: However, I truly believe that our efforts should not be discouraged by these thoughts. No matter how dim the situation appears there have been numerous improvements in the US industry. I can tell you from my own experience that if you look for metric parts, and metric documentation from US suppliers you will get it in a surprising percentage of instances. All these improvements would not be here without USMA's contribution. ((A lot of people have expressed ideas in the discussion (Re: What?) I launched before I went on vacation. There are still e-mails I did not read but I started to get an idea about some ways to act and I was planning to write a conclusion to these thoughts)) 3: One of these conclusions was for us to focus more on achievable goals; to spend less Joules on individuals or isolated situations where the language employed already shows that we are not discussing but arguing. To try to maybe analyze the overall situation and group ourselves into focused departments which would act in areas which will have the greatest impact on the masses. I would like to give an example here: A small modification in the existing fair Pack. & Label. Act which would require the metric to be first and the other explanatory units in brackets would have a great impact. The masses will finally perceive that the ifp is "secondary", "explanatory" and in fact is not a system but only needed for the metric impaired. How hard would it be to gather the political will to pass such an amendment? Maybe very hard, but the law is there and it may actually be justified economically through savings within the NAFTA space. Our plant would not need to print dual cans anymore. Of course the Canadians may have to pitch in and modify a little their equal prominence law, the Mexicans may want also Spanish labeling which would also help the internal US market. etc etc.. but in the end each nation will benefit from the change. Maybe we should start the notion of "NAFTA compatible labeling" or "NAFTA labeling Act" We may find more political will to pass such a law than just a metrication one. A> I will spend more time on it this afternoon 'cause I got to work now! -----Original Message----- From: Andy Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Sunday 01 April 2001 21:38 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:11990] Fwd: my realistic thoughts on metrication I have great respect for Paul Trusten (father of WOMBAT) who has pushed metrication for a long time. I don't think I have the knowledge or credentials or background or experience to challenge Paul. But I sure as hell hope that Paul is wrong as hell in his gloomy summary of the prospects for expeditious metrication. I am going to fret over his comments a bit and then I'll be back with something more to say. I hope that others will stew over his comments a bit and give us a bit more analysis. What are our goals? In the best case, what do we hope to achieve? In the worst case, when and what do we hope to do? What are the odds? What do you think is likely? Sincerely committed to metrication NOW, Andy Johnson --- Paul Trusten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2001 16:13:14 -0500 > From: Paul Trusten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Organization: @Home Network > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [USMA:11988] my realistic thoughts on > metrication > > (In reply to that question offered from our Yahoo > group) > > Now, all of you know that I am pro-metric. I've > participated on this > mailing list for almost four years, and have been > involved with the > metrication issue since before the passage of the > 1975 MCA. Heck, I even > coined the term WOMBAT. But, I fear that, ceteris > paribus, the prospects > for quick US metrication have grown dim with the > passage of time. > > In the US, there has been increased anti-metric > zealotry, primarily > among those who see US metrication as contributing > to the arrival of the > anti-Christ ("the mark", no money passing without it > being recorded, the > New World Order, etc.). Softer versions of this > zealotry imply that the > US is giving in to world domination by adopting SI, > and this doctrine > tends to seep into the consciousness of the average > American. But also, > my own view of US metrication is that it will excite > what I (and author > Alvin Toffler) refer to as "Future Shock", a process > in which there are > too many changes in our daily lives with which we > are uncomfortable (one > bellweather for metrication is my Dad, who says, "I > couldn't be > bothered".) My number one ingredient for US > metrication has been that it > must be inspiring, and I see nothing among > present-day US society to > inspire this change. > > There is only one thing that will do it quickly---an > economic disaster. > If this economic disaster includes problems with US > global competition, > then metrication will become a top national > priority. It will be then > that the participants in this listserv can serve as > the first US Metric > Board, and breathlessly share its expertise with a > nervous government > and nervous CEOs. Gosh darn it, why the US > government and the industrial > captains don't see SI as a hedge against global > trouble NOW, baffles me. > I suppose T. Jefferson applies here: "Mankind are > more disposed to > suffer while evils are sufferable, than to right > themselves by > abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed." > (US Declaration of > Independence [from Britain], July 2, 1776). > > In a reasonably good economy,I do not see > metrication happening "now", > or "soon". By osmosis, it might happen in about 50 > years, one mOsml at a > time. But, if we suddenly encounter a Rooseveltian > depression, then, > IMHO,US metrication will become a sacrament. > -- > Paul Trusten, R.Ph. > 3609 Caldera Boulevard, Apt. 122 > Midland TX 79707-2872 USA > (915)-694-6208 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
