|
http://www.peakoil.com/fortopic2860.html
Euric
New
Poster
Joined: Dec 04, 2004
Posts: 5
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 05,
2004 5:37 am Post subject:
|
  |
|
| MonteQuest wrote: |
| The US dollar is hovering at 9-year lows
against the euro. The US dollar has not been able to mount a
significant rebound even with support from a FED RATE hike,
strong new job numbers, and certainty regarding the outcome of
US Presidential election. On the other hand, the EUR/USD rate
faces strong technical resistance at 1.30. The EUR/USD appears
ready to make a major move towards 1.40, or after failing to
break through technical resistance could retrace back to
1.25. |
Today is 2004-12-04 and the euro is at a
record high just under 1.35 €/$. A week or so ago, the "experts"
predicted it wouldn't get this far until summer 2005. What we are
seeing is a massive sell-off of dollar reserves from around the
world. So much for the technical resistance theory.
Those
"reported" strong new job numbers don't impress anyone in the world.
We all know that US job creation means exporting and destroying well
paying jobs in exchange for those that pay much less and offer
almost no benefits. Which means that for the average American family
a higher dependance on credit for support and thus higher deficits.
The increase in the FED RATE is meaningless if the increase
is so small it is easily lost in the increasing value of the euro.
The Feds will have to raise the rate to that greater then the euro
is appreciating in order to attract investments and hard currency
needed to secure the deficits. However such a move will defintely
destailise the US housing and stock markets. Damned if you do and
damned if you don't.
There are only two ways that I know
of to increase the value of the dollar:
1.) The US would
have to buy back all of the dollars floating around in the world.
But with what would they buy them? They would need euros and other
currencies to exchange and if they have none they can not buy the
dollars back.
2.) Export more then they import. Sounds good
on paper but not realistic. The US has to sell to the world what the
world is willing to buy. Hard to do that if the world is metric and
the US isn't. Also the US has exported much of their job base needed
to produce exportable goods to places like Mexico, China and India.
These places may see increased trade from a falling dollar but not
the US. America wanted to be a service economy and the odd thing is,
the services are not exportable.
The US is going to collapse
into a 3-rd world economy that will not recover for a couple of
generations, if that. | |
| Back to
top |
|
 |
Dvanharn
Senior
Poster
Joined: May 20, 2004
Posts: 105
Location:
Sebastopol, Northern California
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 05,
2004 7:12 am Post subject:
History of metric systems & U.S. resistance to it. |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Hard to do that if the world is metric and the
US isn't. Also the US has exported much of their job base
needed to produce exportable goods to places like Mexico,
China and India. These places may see increased trade from a
falling dollar but not the US. America wanted to be a service
economy and the odd thing is, the services are not exportable.
|
Welcome to
Peakoil.com, Euric. I am guessing that you are from Europe, and I
agree with most of your comments in several posts regarding the
dollar and the Euro.
I remember the resistance to metric
that we have seen in America over my lifetime, and I wish that we
had continued the metrification program that our retrogressive
President Reagan shuffled off to obscurity in 1982. I still recall
people in this country saying that since we were the world's leader,
we shouldn't have to adapt to the stupid metric system - and now it
is coming back to bite us. Here's a brief history of the metric
system and U.S. involvement in half-assed conversion.
The
link at the bottom includes info on the Mars orbiter disaster which
was caused by a metric/english system mixup, and how an effort is
being made to at many levels to switch to metric in the U.S.
However, unless the President comes out and says "It's imperative
for America to go metric as soon as possible," we will continue to
bumble our way toward full metrification as the world moves ahead
without us. However, Bush II is not very enlightened, and not likely
to do anything in this area that would upset any corporations or
conservative voter blocs. Perhaps when U.S. Vice President Dick
Cheney said "The American way of life is not negotiable" he meant
using English measurements as well as driving 8-mpg SUV's.
Here's the brief history of modern metric systems.
| Quote: |
1585: In his book "The Tenth" Simon Stevin
suggests that a decimal system should be used for weights and
measures, coinage, and divisions of the degree of arc.
1670: Authorities give credit for originating the metric
system to Gabriel Mouton, a French vicar, on about this date.
1790: Thomas Jefferson proposed a decimal-based
measurement system for the United States. France's Louis XVI
authorized scientific investigations aimed at a reform of
French weights and measures. These investigations led to the
development of the first "metric" system.
1792: The U.S.
Mint was formed to produce the world's first decimal currency
(the U.S. dollar consisting of 100 cents).
1795: France
officially adopted the metric system.
1866: The use of the
metric system made legal (but not mandatory) in the United
States by the (Kasson) Metric Act of 1866 (Public Law 39-183)
[See: Page 1 and Page 2]. This law also made it unlawful to
refuse to trade or deal in metric quantities.
1875: The
Convention of the Metre signed in Paris by 18 nations,
including the United States. The Meter Convention, often
called the Treaty of the Meter in the United States, provided
for improved metric weights and measures and the establishment
of the General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM)
devoted to international agreement on matters of weights and
measures.
1889: As a result of the Metre Convention, the
U.S. received a prototype meter and kilogram to be used as
measurement standards.
1893: These metric prototypes were
declared "fundamental standards of length and mass" in the
Mendenhall Order. Since that date, the yard, pound, etc. have
been officially defined in terms of the metric system.
1916: The Metric Association formed as a non-profit
organization advocating adoption of the metric system in U.S.
commerce and education. The organizational name started as the
American Metric Association and was changed to the U.S. Metric
Association (USMA) in 1974.
1920: The Metric Association
published its first metric style guide.
1954: The
International System of Units began its development. Six new
metric base units were adopted.
1958: A conference of
English-speaking nations agreed to unify their standards of
length and mass, and define them in terms of metric measures.
The American yard was shortened and the imperial yard was
lengthened as a result. The new conversion factors were
announced in 1959 in the Federal Register.
1964: The
National Bureau of Standards (NBS) made the metric system its
standard "except when the use of these units would obviously
impair communication or reduce the usefulness of a report."
1968: Public Law 90-472 authorized a 3-year U.S. Metric
Study, to determine the impact of increasing metric use on the
U.S. This study was carried out by the National Bureau of
Standards (NBS).
1971: The U.S. Metric Study resulted in a
Report to the Congress: A Metric America, A Decision Whose
Time Has Come. The 13-volume report concluded that the U.S.
should, indeed, "go metric" deliberately and carefully through
a coordinated national program, and establish a target date 10
years ahead, by which time the U.S. would be predominately
metric.
1973: The UCLA/USMA/LACES/STC/and other
professional groups National Metric Conference, the largest
ever held, totaling 1700 registrants, took place at the
University of California, Los Angeles in September. It took
place as a result of USMA's recommendation. USMA coordinated
and directed the event. One of the speakers was the U.S.
Secretary of Commerce. Also, the American National Metric
Council (ANMC) formed as a not-for-profit, non-advocative
trade organization to plan and coordinate SI implementation by
U.S. industry.
1974: The Education Amendments of 1974
(Public Law 92-380) encouraged educational agencies and
institutions to prepare students to use the metric system of
measurement as part of the regular educational program.
1975: The Metric Conversion Act of 1975 (Public Law
94-168) passed by Congress. The Act established the U.S.
Metric Board to coordinate and plan the increasing use and
voluntary conversion to the metric system. However, the Act
was devoid of any target dates for metric conversion.
1979: The Treasury Department's Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) requires wine producers and
importers to switch to metric bottles in seven standard [liter
and milliliter] sizes.
1980: The Treasury Department's
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (BATF) requires
distilled spirits (hard liquor) bottles to conform to the
volume of one of six standard metric [liter and milliliter]
sizes.
1982: President Ronald Reagan disbanded the U.S.
Metric Board and canceled its funding. Responsibility for
metric coordination was transferred to the Office of Metric
Programs in the Department of Commerce.
1988: The Omnibus
Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-418)
amended and strengthened the Metric Conversion Act of 1975,
designating the SI metric system as the preferred measurement
system, and requiring each federal agency to be metric by the
end of fiscal year 1992.
1991: President George H. W. Bush
signed Executive Order 12770, Metric Usage in Federal
Government Programs directing all executive departments and
federal agencies implement the use of the metric system. The
Executive Order is also available as an appendix to:
Interpretation of the SI for the United States and Federal
Government Metric Conversion Policy
1994: The Fair
Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA) was amended by the Food and
Drug and Administration (FDA) to require the use of dual units
(inch-pound AND metric) on all consumer products.
1996: As
of July 1996 all surface temperature observations in National
Weather Service METAR/TAF reports are now transmitted in
degrees Celsius.
2000: September: This deadline that all
agreements, contracts, and plans processed by individual
states for federally-funded highway construction be in metric
units was canceled by Congressional action, leaving metric
conversion as voluntary but still recommended to comply with
the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988. Several
State Departments of Transportation continue to use the metric
system despite the deadline being rescinded.
2001-April:
U.S. Stock Exchanges finalized the change to decimal trading.
The Securities and Exchange Commission has ordered that all
stocks must be quoted in dollars and cents rather than
fractions by this date. The switch to decimal trading brought
the U.S. in line with the rest of the world's major exchanges.
This follows the change of the Canadian Stock Exchanges to
decimal trading in 1996.
Future metric deadlines:
2005 January 20: Target date for road signs in Ireland to
be converted from miles to kilometers. To accompany this, new
cars must have kilometers as the primary speed displayed on
their speedometers.
200?: The U.S. should allow
metric-only packaging by amending the Fair Packaging and
Labeling Act (FPLA). This would be a good step towards meeting
EU requirements for SI-only labels in 2009.
2009 December
31: All products sold in Europe (with limited exceptions) will
be required to have only SI metric units on their labels. Dual
labeling will not be permitted. Implementation of the labeling
directive, previously 1999 December 31, was extended by the EU
Commission for 10 years, giving more time for companies to
comply and for U.S. regulations to allow metric-only labeling
on consumer products.
|
US Metric Association Website
(Note that
the website is on a Colorado State University website, and not on a
U.S. government website.)
Dave | |
| Back to
top |
|
|
