>Despite my own tough stand on the realistic chances for QUICK US >metrication, I have no intention of abandoning this cause, nor do I >expect to join the "why do we need metric" crowd of ostriches. In fact, >as I said in my previous comments,it makes no sense for the people with >much of the money in the US not to consider major investing in US >metrication. I just don't understand why these very smart people want to >continue to carry two sets of inventories, one for the US consumption >and the other for the rest of the world. I'm sure there is a reason they >can give to justify it, but I don't bottle milk or make fasteners for a >living, so I don't know the answer. > >Once again, it is the INSPIRATION or lack thereof, towards US >metrication, which is the rate-limiting step in this issue. I, for one, >intend to keep on fighting for metric, and damn the WOMBAT torpedoes! > >So, I'm a realist, but I continue to be a zealot for SI. I'm going the >extra kilometer. >-- >Paul Trusten, R.Ph. >3609 Caldera Boulevard, Apt. 122 >Midland TX 79707-2872 USA >(915)-694-6208 >[EMAIL PROTECTED] Whom are you writing about? You say "it makes no sense for the people with >much of the money in the US not to consider major investing in US >metrication. I just don't understand why these very smart people want to >continue to carry two sets of inventories," The big industries are already metric: the automobile industry, the agricultural machinery industry, the photographic industry, IBM and much of the computer industry, In fact those big industries that do a world-wide business tend to be metric. The exception is the airplane industry because it feels that it dominates the field. The hold-outs are to be found among the little firms who don't export. 50 years ago I read a book entitled "History is on our side". It wasn't about metrication and I forget who was the author, but it would be a good battle cry in our war for SI. Joseph B. Reid 17 Glebe Road West Toronto M5P 1C8 Tel. 416 486-6071
