On Wed, 09 Oct 2002 11:30:19  
 Jim Elwell wrote:
...
>However, I do not believe the US federal government can or should impose 
>metrication.

This is evidently your opinion (which we should respect).  But the US constitution is 
clear on this that they DO have the power to fix the standards and all, so...

> I philosophically believe that is beyond the legitimate scope 
>of the government, as it means restricting the peaceable, non-fraudulent 
>and non-coercive activities of individuals, which I believe is 
>fundamentally wrong.
>...
I won't debate the above further since it seems our positions are apparently 
entrenched, so, no use doing it...

...
>There are several reasons I believe that non-coercive metrication will work 
>in the USA:
>
>(a) It is already working -- the evidence for this is incontrovertible. 
>Just because it is happening slower than most of us would like does not 
>mean it is not happening.
>
I just came from a 5-day trip to the US (Lake Tahoe/Reno region) and I must confess 
that *TRULY* such evidence is NOT incontrovertible (sorry...) at all.  I was very 
disappointed in what I saw.  I went to supermarkets, gift stores, read maps, 
restaurants... and thoroughly looked at products being sold.  The only thing that one 
can say is that one indeed sees more metric values in labels but that the 
'incontrovertible', overwhelming majority (90-95% +) of *quantities* offered by 
suppliers was in hard rational ifp sizes.  (The ONLY product that had metric units in 
them exclusively, but not in ALL brands, was in wine labels - 750 ml.  And the 
funny/interesting thing that I must comment is that it was nearly always VERY hard to 
spot where they had put the measurement values, as if producers wanted to "hide" that 
value!!!...) 

This can certainly NOT be construed as progress.  Besides, consumers don't pay 
attention to the other units they would not be familiar with, just like we, metric 
consumers, never "notice" there is the stupid inch in our school rulers...

Therefore, it's obvious why we continue to hear from folks that metrication is a 
non/dead issue right now over there and that nothing changed.

On the airplane the magazine that showed duty-free products was even more appalling.  
Out of a total of some close to 200 pages of marketing info I could spot only 1 place 
(that's right, ONE!) where there was ANY reference to metric units (a tool for 
tightening nuts - 15, 17 and 19 mm)!

So, you're dreaming in technicolor, Jim (still!...).  You're the eternal optimist who 
seems to want the rest of us to believe in an illusion!

>(b) The USA is now the lone wolf. When ANY other country converted, they 
>did so AGAINST the economic pressures from the largest economy in the 
>world. That obviously is not a constraint against US metrication. Pressures 
>external to the USA are clearly TOWARDS metrication, rather than away from it.
>
Tell that to TV, aviation, treadmill, computer... consumers around the world...  And 
with the coming of the internet US' influence in the minds of English speaking 
consumers around the globe will tend to shift dramatically to their being much more 
exposed to ifp units.

>(c) Metric is better. All else aside, it is easier to use and learn, and is 
>more efficient in the long run. That is a low-level but ever present 
>pressure towards metrication.
>...
True, but the above doesn't seem to be making any significant inroads in the minds of 
those who matter the most...

Marcus


____________________________________________________________
Get 25MB of email storage with Lycos Mail Plus!
Sign up today -- http://www.mail.lycos.com/brandPage.shtml?pageId=plus 

Reply via email to