Yes, world affairs will certainly come into play; however I have a hard time speculating about Iraq or the next president. These issues get rather contentious and can't be conclusively debated. Economically we could let slide some of the minor trade issues we historically pursue (such as France and bananas), we haven't nationalized our natural resources- I believe European oil companies have some investment here in our wells, perhaps theres some tariff we could lift... Its hard to say at the moment.
My best guess is we repeal FPLA so they can sell any of their goods on our market without slapping a sticker on everything. On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 05:45:23 +0100, "Martin Vlietstra" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > The answer to this one will be political. If the US is to persuade the > EU > to postpone things again, what will the US offer in return? Questions > concerning Iraq will almost certainly be on the negotiating table. It > also > depends on who Bush's successor is (who will still be in his or her first > year of office) > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bernard Rachtmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 11:34 PM > Subject: [USMA:37370] Re: Interesting document on the NIST metric page > > > > Hi, new poster here. > > > > In a nutshell I can't see it happening... > > I suspect a compromise will ultimately be struck. Conversely, I am not > > surprised that the FPLA hasn't been amended....yet. Though I'm not > > well-versed on the issue, its clear both sides would lose if neither > > yielded. Also if only one were to yield there would still be trade > > dilemas. My guess is that this particular EU directive will be > > suspended indefinitely, while FPLA will be amended. > > > > Lets be honest here, many American consumers are familiar with certain > > inch-pound sizes (I can't see milk exclusively marked "3.79 L." with no > > mention of gallon by 2010, etc), and should there be extras or a > > packaging run duplicated, they'll want the potential market still open. > > Now, a EU-made product thats all metric would need only slap a sticker > > on for US sales, rather than tear off or marker out the contents. > > Besides, doesn't this directive also ban inch/pound from advertisements, > > brochures and even websites? This realistically would cause too much > > commotion in commerce. > > Perhaps they haven't amended it yet so it could be used as a potential > > bargaining chip. > > > > > > On Sun, 15 Oct 2006 20:10:24 -0600, "Mike Millet" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > > > I was looking through the NIST metric page for any updated information > on > > > amending the FPLA and found this PDF which was a business alert released > > > by > > > the NIST a couple months back.. > > > > > > > http://ts.nist.gov/WeightsAndMeasures/Metric/upload/Business_Alert_2010.pdf > > > > > > The composer of the document seems to not be for or against metric > > > transition but the document did a good job of summarizing the relevant > > > information. > > > > > > I found it shocking that several organizations within the EU are > actually > > > pressuring the EU to continue the use of dual labelling simply because > US > > > companies haven't switched, but I'm sure this deadline will not get > > > extended > > > once more. > > > > > > Has there been any more relevant movement or information on the issue > > > that > > > anyone is aware of or is it doomed to a slow quiet death in a > > > congressional > > > commitee ? > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > -- > > > "The boy is dangerous, they all sense it why can't you?" > > -- > > Bernard Rachtmann > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -- > > http://www.fastmail.fm - Or how I learned to stop worrying and > > love email again > > > -- Bernard Rachtmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail
