You wrote:

> You may know that the United States was the first nation to introduce
> decimal currency. Would you like to return to the "human touch" of
> the old British system of (this may not be right) 20 pence to the
> shilling and 12 shillings to the pound, the system discarded by the
> British in 1971 in favor of our own decimal system?
>

Wrong way round!!  It was actually 12 pence to the shilling and twenty shillings to 
the pound!

Regards,

Steve.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Michael-O" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2003 12:12 AM
Subject: [USMA:26089] Re: In for a penny, in for a ... kilogram--your recent column - 
Appendix


> What I forgot!
> 
> I truly believe that the modern metric system *is* in the interest of
> America's way of life
> 
> It is all about the freedom to measure, it is about that you can solve every
> measurement problem where others fail.
> 
> 
> Freedom for life - Freedom to measure!
> 
> 
> Paul Trusten, R.Ph. wrote:
> > Dear Mr. Lewis,
> >
> > I read with great interest your online column "In for a penny, in for
> > a...kilogram" (May 29, 2003), and have spent the interim preparing my
> > response. Since my parents did not raise me to speak and write vulgar
> > slang, I waited two weeks so I could calm down before writing this.
> >
> > Your article asks why the United States, after 28 years of considering
> > conversion to the metric system, is still "pounding and inching
> > along". One of the primary reasons for this, I believe, is because
> > people such as yourself have newspaper columns, and singlehandedly,
> > are in a position to publish opinions and information as prejudiced,
> > as narrow, and as fractured as the material you put into the
> > above-mentioned column. The prevalence of such dim views of a subject
> > make me yearn to have a newspaper column of my own so that I could at
> > least back up my widely disseminated opinions with facts. Does your
> > paper have an opening for a new writer?
> >
> > I start by saying that I am an American, native born and lifelong,
> > who is proud of the United States and what it has done for its people
> > and for the people of the world. I wholeheartedly support President
> > Bush in his effort to protect the United States from terrorism. And
> > accordingly, I condemn the French for their barbed opposition to our
> > efforts to eliminate a great threat from Iraq. But there is one thing
> > that I will always thank the French for, and that is their invention
> > of the metric system.
> >
> >
> > You say that the metric system is "boring and sterile", and "suitable
> > only for mathematicians and other colorless folk". I've never before
> > heard someone compare units of measurement for their entertainment
> > value, and I do not measure things to be entertained. I measure
> > things to accomplish some task, such as framing pictures, cutting
> > paper, or judging how much space I need for a carpet. Sometimes I
> > need to expand these measurements into larger units or reduce them to
> > smaller units. The American plan of measurement, using 12 inches to a
> > foot, etc., is so cumbersome and so silly compared to a decimal
> > system that I would equate it to being sterile of thought. I long to
> > use a measurement system in which all the units are decimally
> > related. That, this inch-weary American feels, would be a most
> > exciting and fertile change in our society. I yearn for what you
> > call, almost with approval, "the all-too-even 10". No,  the  "Way Of
> > Measuring Badly in America Today" (I use the acronym WOMBAT to
> > describe our "system" of measurement, which is unsystematic)  is not,
> > as you say, "just fine". It is bad for the individual user, and, as
> > you shall shortly read, bad for America.
> >
> > You were partially correct when you observed that the United States
> > is one of only three nations not officially using the metric system.
> > However, the Congress declared in 1988 that the metric system is the
> > "preferred system of measurement for trade" in the United States.
> > Congress has long known what the American people have been reluctant
> > to recognize: that being alone in the world with our measurements is
> > a major hindrance to our global competitiveness as a people, both in
> > academics and in trade. American producers must produce one set of
> > goods with US units for domestic sale and one set of goods with
> > metric units for export, and this has to be a major incumbrance to
> > our economy. So, I must disagree with your statement that our
> > metrological kinship with Liberia and Myanmar is "a good thing". I
> > think it is a very bad thing, since much of the world looks to the
> > United States for wisdom, not backwardness.
> >
> > Of all the provocative statements you made in your column, the one
> > notion which irks me above all the others is your using that
> > ignorance-perpetuating old ruse about metric units, making hard
> > conversions of US units to metric and using them in a statement to
> > show how supposedly cumbersome metric is, e.g., that Newville was
> > 17.7028 kilometers from Carlisle. Please tell your readers that, in a
> > metric America, one will say that Newville is about 18 kilometers
> > from Carlisle, period.  Once the US converts to metric, there will be
> > no more frequent converting. There will only be metric units being
> > used. Please stop spreading that kind of prejudicial venom, which I
> > believe is a hindrance, not just to metric conversion, but to much of
> > human progress.
> >
> > You may know that the United States was the first nation to introduce
> > decimal currency. Would you like to return to the "human touch" of
> > the old British system of (this may not be right) 20 pence to the
> > shilling and 12 shillings to the pound, the system discarded by the
> > British in 1971 in favor of our own decimal system?
> >
> > I'm not a mathematician, but I would not describe mathematicians as
> > colorless folk. On the contrary, I sense that their craft brought
> > much color into the world, including the color pictures of all types
> > we now see from around the world on our web browsers. These people
> > are actually the color of the world, and a few of them, a couple of
> > hundred years ago in France, gave the world an easy and convenient
> > way of measuring things. Both as a patriotic American, and as someone
> > who just has to measure stuff from time to time, I want to join that
> > world. But I can't join it if American columnists like you persist in
> > attempting to rob America of the measurement system it deserves.
> >
> > Please reconsider what you have written.
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> >
> > Paul Trusten
> > 3609 Caldera Boulevard, Apartment 122
> > Midland TX 79707-2872 USA
> > 432-694-6208
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > "There are two cardinal sins, from
> > which all the others spring: impatience
> > and laziness."
> >                           ---Franz Kafka
> 

Reply via email to