See "Metric Today," May-June 2005, page 1, bottom, "Caribbean Countries
Respond to EU Metric Directive," detailing the recent steps deemed necessary
by members of  the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM ) to
advance their metrication. There should be quite a few asterisks on the list
of metric countries.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen Humphreys" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 09:34
Subject: [USMA:35267] Re: liberia and myanmar then on to UK and Barbados


> I agree (from a different perspective) with Phil here.
> I'm always perplexed when some organisations claim that "only US, etc etc
is
> non-metric".
> This would mean that the "m" on British roads means metres (as 'miles'
don't
> exist in officially metric countries).
> However, don't stop at Britain! Most of the caribbean is still mixed or
> imperial dominant.
> I've just come back from Barbados where the mix is very strong.
> Smaller shops use lb/oz measuring devices whereas large supermarkets use
> metric at the counter but mixed at the loose stuff (likethe UK).
> Unlike the UK the roads are 'meant' to be metric.  However no town has a
> distance sign (which is a right pain) and the site of km/h speed limits
are
> fairly rare.  However - privately made signs are a mix of mile, yard, km
and
> m.  My hire car was japanese and thus metric speedo and km milometer.
> What was quite strange was talking to a taxi driver who, despite his
speedo
> being metric only (it was a japanese care), referred to all distances in
> miles (inluding a calypso style even tthat happens in bridgetown in
March).
> I asked him how long he'd been a taxi driver - 6 yrs.  As far as I know
> Barbados roads have been 'metric' for ages.
>
> So in conclusion I have no idea why only 3 countries are quoted as being
> non-metric.
>
>
> >From: "Philip S Hall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> >Subject: [USMA:35241] Re: liberia and myanmar
> >Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 12:41:45 -0000
> >
> >Dear Amy
> >
> >It's the term *offcially* metric that is the key here. I'm English and
live
> >in the UK. My country is officially metric. However you might not think
so
> >if you lived here too. Our road signs are still imperial and there are no
> >formal plans to change them (although there is a long term obligation do
so
> >as a member state of the European Union). The state owned broadcaster,
the
> >BBC, is very poor at consistent metric usage and have no policy on the
> >issue.
> >
> >I wish you the very best of luck with your research project Amy, and as
you
> >have already begun to observe it isn't a simple matter.
> >
> >Regards
> >Phil Hall
> >
> >----- Original Message ----- From: "Amy Wang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]>
> >Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2005 3:02 AM
> >Subject: [USMA:35236] liberia and myanmar
> >
> >
> >>Hello,
> >>
> >>I am a graduate student researching the status of the metric system  in
> >>the U.S. for my thesis, and am hoping for some help. In many  sources
I've
> >>seen the statistic that only three countries in the  world are not yet
> >>officially metric--the U.S., Liberia, and Myanmar.  Yet when I looked
> >>quickly on the Lonely Planet travel guide online,  it seems there are
> >>other spots that are not metric either, such as  Aruba and Bermuda.
> >>They're not considered countries, but neither are  they part of
> >>U.S./Liberia/Myanmar, so perhaps someone knows whether  and where the
> >>original statement can be verified?
> >>
> >>Thank you!
> >>Amy.
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Reply via email to