On Fri, 1 Jun 2001 11:33:28 Jim Elwell wrote: >Welcome back, Marcus! I was wondering why your erudite input had been >missing! > :-) Thanks, Jim. Yes, I'm back and... 'kicking'... ;-) >I've read most of your emails, and believe we have three fundamental, >philosophical differences that mean we will pretty much have to agree to >disagree: > So it seems, unfortunately... :-( But... >(1) I believe the US is metricating, and will be pretty much metric, without >being coerced by law, within another 20 years or so. Apparently most others >on this list believe that legislation mandating metrication is the only way >it will ever happen. > Today is 2001-Jun-03. I'll hold you to that, my friend. I'm almost sure I'll be alive on 2021-Jun-03. Just as I'm almost sure this will NOT happen, but you have another 20 years to... 'prove' me wrong. ;-) (BTW, you already had 140, as some here suggested, and you're still... waiting for that day above... ;-) ) But, just an addendum, I do not accept 'being metric' without that being in the 'mouth of the people', if you know what I mean... :-) >Jim Frysinger has posted indicating that he believes market forces will do >the job, except that it will take quite a while. Perhaps the only difference >in our perception is how fast the market forces will work. > Not only that, but we have been witnessing such dreadful 'power' work *against* us (please see aviation, TV sizes, computer industry, etc). >(2) I believe that any law mandating that metric units be used is coercion, >Period, no exceptions, no weaseling about "well, if we give them time and >they are warned." > I didn't talk about 'time' or warning, for starters, but just as I'm sure you don't consider traffic lights to be coercion one could build a strong case to demonstrate to you that metrication would not be coercive if done properly. But, oh, well... I forgot you mentioned we'd have to agree to disagree, so, I'm sorry, I shouldn't continue to be arguing about this one. My sincere apologies, Jim (really! :-) ). >...(3) Marcus writes: "I'm sorry, but just like you mistrust the power of >governments to "coerce" people, I also mistrust the power of business >establishments!!!" That pretty much sums it up! I'll restrain myself from >debating you on this, as we are both pretty much stuck in our opinions. > ? Hmm... Not sure what you meant. But it just went to show that both of us have fears about powers that be. The difference though is that at least in principle governments are supposed to "look after us", while businesses usually don't have that "noble" commitment!... ;-) And one is given certain powers (like fix the standards), while the other 'believes' it could interfere with that without being given any such powers. I.e. one would exercise its 'right' given and voted in 'by the people', while the other 'thinks' it would have the same right, or the one to fight that constitutional right the former has. (Food for thought... ;-) ) > >There are several other things I want to address, but will do so in separate >emails, to keep the length down. >... Fine. We'll get to it when the time comes. Cheers, Marcus Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/
