So then, we have a free trade block that has at least two different measurement
systems, one of which has to different variations.
And to think that metric was originally designed to be a system for use in
international trade.
Thanks for checking on this, Joe. It would be nice if the potential "Free Trade Zone
of the Americas" would include a metric conversion provision.
greg
>>> Joseph B. Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2001-03-30 16:00:03 >>>
Gregory Peterson wrote in USMA 11925:
>I thought there was a provision under the NAFTA trade agreement that
>requested the US to adopt the metric system. It is in that forum that I
>could see a request having the largest impact, especially if Mexico added
>their voice to Canada's.
I spent 2 hours in the Toronto Public Reference Library this afternoon
scanning the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA) of 1988 and the xx +
804 pages of the North American Free Trade Agreement of 1992.
In FTA I found acres, bushels, tonnes, gallons (imperial or US?) of wine,
and cubic feet of automobile luggage space.
NAFTA had regulations regarding textiles in centimeters, meters per
kilogram, square meters, square centimeters, mm, grams, g/m2, and decitex.
Automobile luggage space was in cubic feet. Engine displacement was in cc.
Sugar was measured by metric ton. Food was in g and kg. TV tubes were
classified as having a diagonal more or less than 14 inches (35.56 cm).
There were also references to 30.5 cm. "Each party shall use as a basis
international standards" or a higher level of protection.
I found no hint in NAFTA of a request that USA should adopt the metric system.
Joseph B. Reid
17 Glebe Road West
Toronto M5P 1C8 Tel. 416 486-6071
