Welcome aboard, Carl! :-) Nice to have "new blood" around, so, please feel welcome here. More below.
On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 09:06:11 Carl Sorenson wrote: ... >I want to respond to what John (kilopascal) said. > >>You just don't understand the American way of doing things. Let me >explain: >>First, you find out what way everyone else is doing it. >>Second, just to be different, you do it the exact opposite. And make a big >>effort to force your way on the world. >>When the world rejects American methods, America responds with spite and >>nastiness, insisting the world is full of anti-American ingrates who hate >>America, who hate freedom and democracy, and want to force the great >America >>to follow their inferior practices. >>Americans believe that America became great because of American methods and >>the world is jealous of American greatness. Get the point! >>It is the matter of the US wanting to be different, so it can brag that its >>difference is the right way and everyone else is wrong. This is why the >>metric battle is being lost. >> >>John > >I don't know where you're from, but I am American and I know what we think. >I would also like to remind you that this is the mailing list for the *U.S.* >Metric Association. Your whining is offensive to most Americans (my >roommate agrees with me). Fortunately, it is also very inaccurate. I have >data to back that up. > Carl, first of all, John is American, too. Second of all, his views while not indicative of the majority here still do seem to reflect both the perception in many a foreigner's mind about Americans and the sentiment of some in American society (even if they are minority ones). The question though is whether or not such views can be strong enough to "carry the day" in latest developments. Unfortunately, so far as one can tell, it certainly seems to have been (and continue to be!...) instrumental when it comes to progress towards metrication in the US. Perhaps you are not familiar with some of these latest developments. Therefore, please allow me to bring you up to speed with some of these very briefly. DOT's: these departments have been backpedaling like crazy lately and unfortunately will ultimately bring the demise of the commendable efforts made by so many of them towards adopting metric units in highways, roads, etc in the US. I foresee a total, complete return of the US to ifp units in this realm by no later than 2005 or so. EU's metric-only directive: there has been 3 postponements of this directive so far thanks to the idiots at TABD (a largely American businesses group association that defends American businesses interest before Europe) who continue to pound at the European Parliament to force them to do so. Hopefully though this will be the last of the last (and we along with Europeans are already planning to make sure that it will be so!!! :-( ). American products overseas: we continue to see relentless flooding of ifp products everywhere without much regard to the metric reality of other countries. Things like treadmill machines in mph only, tire pressure and sizes in inches only, cars power in HP, computer monitors, floppy disquettes, TV sizes in inches, boat, RV sizes in feet, aviation... and the list could go on and on and on... Anti-metrication sentiment and campaigns: despite some very meager progress that only the most optimistic here in this group (those who call this the... "drop in the ocean bucket" approach...) can see and celebrate the reality seems to show that these groups and people always seem to win the day in the end, all that it takes is that progress gets in their nerve and gets too close for convert for them to come strongly against and force the situation back to where it was! So, while I can't speak for John here, I think I don't consider that John would want his comments to be taken as offensive to Americans since (hey!) he is one of them himself!... His comments have mostly been more... "rhetorical" than anything else (at least that's how I see them...). They're also perhaps aimed at "striking a never with some here" in the hopes that they would stir them to action or something... ;-) Anyway, 'nough said about this. >Americans are perfectly aware that the metric system is better. We have not >changed yet because most people are simply more used to the other system, >and change implies cost and risk. Wealthy nations tend to be conservative, >and we are no exception. Also, as the world's largest economy and as the >producer of much of the scientific research, technological progress, etc., >of course we are used to getting our own way. I can certainly appreciate the well-balanced perspective that you bring to the table, Carl. However, I must disagree with you on the "cost and risk" aspect. Why? Firstly, because the cost aspect IS A HUGE MYTH! Nothing can be further from the truth. This is the kind of fallacy that many of us here have been struggling and working so hard to dispell. It's regrettable that people tend to look only at the *initial investment* aspect of metrication. They completely overlook the reality of the long run gains of using the SI system. Therefore, I'm sorry, but this is the first perception that we would like you to be mindful of. Secondly, the risk factor. I'm sorry, again, but I cannot accept this aspect as justification either! Why? Again, simple, how can there be ANY risk associated with metrication when *everybody* else uses it? Or when the SI system itself is so much better than the other archaic one? The only risks that I can see are the ones associated with doing/handling the transition wrong or not appropriately or being rather careless about it! When a well-thought-out strategic plan is put into action metrication rather goes along well and trouble-free! Sorry, but since the SI system is THE *definitive* system there can be no (or very minimal) risks actually of using it. Conservatism is unfortunately a trace that should NEVER be cherished in the world of business, my friend. Those that do become dinosaurs and run the risk of being trampled over by others that may be more agile, creative and innovative. (Note: There is merit though in being like that but ONLY in very specific situations and usually for brief periods of time, so don't take my comment as being completely against conservatism) The world in which we live in by the very nature of technology is a constantly changing one. Those who are NOT willing to "play the game" will invariably fall apart along the way! Finally, as for being the largest, most powerful, etc, this should not be grounds for forcing one's way onto other people necessarily. This goes to *mentality/attitude*. One can be the former without necessarily doing it *this way*. > If any other country had as >many people and as much military and economic power, they also would be used >to getting their own way. Not necessarily, Carl. Please see my comment above. Actually history teaches us that those who did it this way in the past ended up losing in the end! Why do we refuse to learn the lessons of history is something I can't fathom... :-( The fact of the matter is, that the so-called "new world order" should be based on other types of premises and frameworks and not based on the "powerful conquering the weak". Why do you think there has been so much opposition to globalization, for instance, lately (even in US soil!...)? Because this process is being perceived by many as the perpetuation of the strong dominating the weak! ;-) A vicious circle that MUST be broken! > It is encouraging that despite our power, so many >of us still want to use the metric system. I conducted a small survey to >see what people think, and the results are encouraging (the survey is at the >end of this email). > Hmm... Well... I'm sorry, but where you see encouragement (and perhaps justifiably so) I also see some troublesome areas... I'll point them out below. >I have heard a few scenarios of what the future may hold for metrication: >1. FFU will spread it's influence like a cancer (from John) >2. Critical mass will be reached with metrication and the U.S. will become >metricated in as little as a decade. (I don't remember who it's from) > >I expect that the truth lies somewhere in the middle, where it has a >tendency to lie. I sincerely hope you're right here... > Americans tend to be familiar with metric, but not as >familiar as with inches-pounds. Most of us don't really care what unit >something is in when we buy stuff at the supermarket, or even notice. I >would, since I am a metric enthusiast, but most Americans buy 2-liters of >soft drinks without a second thought. Four shampoo bottles in my bathroom >have rounded metric sizes (I have five roommates, so we have a lot). We >learn metric in school if we study any science at all. > The problem though, Carl, is not with the "silent majority", but with the *vocal minority*!!! THESE are the folks that unfortunately may be responsible to put good efforts to rest, especially when it comes to politicians' role in the process. Whoever complain the loudest get the ears from Washington, so to speak. So, this is the type of battle we're been forced to fight, Carl. So, the question is then: how to fight this??? I'd like to see some of us here do it *the same way*, i.e. fight fire with fire! Not that we should be disloyal, but that we should just as vehemently defend the SI system for the US as "ifp goons" defend theirs! Hopefully, by doing so, politicians may feel justified to opt for doing "the right thing"!... ;-) >I have some ideas about what the U.S. should do to metricate while avoiding >the intense opposition that always seems to surface. >1. I think most people would not mind metric-only labeling in supermarkets. >This would really help metric-compliant manufacturers. Agreed. Now tell that to politicians in Congress... >2. I like the idea of metric units on driver's licenses. People don't >really pay much attention to the licenses, but they would start to learn >height and weight in metric. Good idea, but would that stir people to start using metric units for those things?... Hmm... >3. We should not push for metricating American sports--American football >will probably always use yards, and I think that is ok. Any politician who >would advocate otherwise will lose the election. You may be right. There are those though who think that this could be a big boost to the cause, so... debatable. >4. Don't undefine or unlegalize non-metric measures. That could not happen >until we are all metricated, or companies would be in big trouble (not to >mention all of our laws). This is actually a very intriguing and possibly worthwhile... "tactic" whose efficacy though is indeed debatable. >5. I think the biggest thing we could do would be to allow corporations to >get a tax write-off for metrication-related expenses. A write-off could tip >the scales toward metrication. Even if only 5% of expenses were metric, >that would be a huge improvement because it would encourage metric skills, >manufacturing, product lines, awareness, etc. Americans follow a profit >motive. > Now you hit something here! This IMHO is *dead on*!!! I, too, advocate the "carrot" approach. This may indeed be the single most effective and powerful strategy that the US government could ever adopt IF they were really serious about getting this job done! Well thought, Carl! >Question: what does FFU stand for? If it is something profane, I'd rather >not know what it is (you can never tell). What should I call the current >U.S. system? > No, it's not exactly profane, Carl. It stands for Fred Flintstones Units (to me this is actually quite... befitting... ;-) ). As for what to call the 'US system', there are several options at your disposal, Carl. I, personally, call "it" ifp. Others here have a wide variety of names for "it": wombat, FFU, HAU, ip, Ye Olde English Units, etc... >I wanted to learn what people thought about the metric system, so I >conducted a survey. The survey was given to 18 people at my school, Brigham >Young University... > >How much do you: >5. use the metric system in your classes? >Frequently Sometimes Occasionally Rarely >4 5 2 6 > No surprise or comment needed here. >6. use the metric system in conversation? >Frequently Sometimes Occasionally Rarely >1 2 6 9 > Ditto. >7. hear another person use the metric system? >Frequently Sometimes Occasionally Rarely >0 4 8 6 > Ditto. Interesting though to notice the different perception here. While in the previous one there was the apparent willingness of some (1) to *use* it, there would be no reciprocity in terms of "hearing it back"... >8. read a publication which uses the metric system? >Frequently Sometimes Occasionally Rarely >2 7 4 5 > The above may be so perhaps because most of these people being highly educated would not read as much of "junk" (or more popular) publications as the general population. However, I'd say that if this survey were conducted with a different segment of the population the results would be markedly different... >9. understand metric quantities that you hear or read? >Frequently Sometimes Occasionally Rarely >12 3 1 2 > No surprise here. However, there seems to still exist some that don't seem to care to learn it (2)... >For the following questions, indicate how strongly you agree or disagree >with the statement. >10. The metric system is better than the customary system of measurement. >Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neutral Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree >8 6 3 1 0 > Unfortunately this small sample goes to show that there might be quite a few people out there yet who can't seem to even recognize this simple undisputed truth! Sigh... >11. Supermarket should be allowed to sell food labeled only in metric >quantities (such as liters and grams). >Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neutral Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree >3 2 9 4 0 > 4 out of 18 disagree with *allowing* metric-only labeling. To me, I'm sorry, Carl, this is VERY alarming stats! We're talking about *allowing* here, for crying out loud. This stats should actually be either nill or 1, tops!!!... >12. The U.S. should switch to the metric system rather than the current >system. >Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neutral Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree >5 8 3 1 1 > 2 out of 18 disagreeing with the move! There is your small "vocal minority" at play here, Carl! >13. I feel pretty comfortable with the metric system if I hear others use it >or if I read it. >Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neutral Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree >7 8 2 1 0 > Despite a small number of them feeling uncomfortable, please notice that when it comes to metrication "more people" would come against the move! Interesting and very telling stats indeed... >14. Why do you think that the customary (English) system is so dominant in >the United States? >various answers >... Naturally... Marcus Is your boss reading your email? ....Probably Keep your messages private by using Lycos Mail. Sign up today at http://mail.lycos.com
