--- Jim Elwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The question is whether companies with employees and leadership not >> particularly >> friendly toward metric will change without putting up a fight. That's >> the area where I think leadership at the government level could smooth >> things over. > > We generally agree, but the nature of the government "leadership" has a big > effect: if it is > mandates, there will be a lot of resistance. However, as I've said many times > in the past on > this forum, if the US Federal Government is the single largest purchaser of > goods and services > in the country, and if it simply said "we buy metric," it would have a huge > positive effect on > metrication, without passing laws on private institutions.
I wasn't advocating legally forcing anyone to use metric (though that's an interesting subject for debate). I was suggesting that a presidential administration should use its voice to tell people that metric is coming and they better be prepared for it. The presidency could be used as the proverbial "bully pulpit" to help persuade people that these changes are here to stay, and not something that will go away eventually. That was what I meant by "leadership". Needless to say, I strongly agree that the US government should buy metric. As to legislatively forcing people to use metric, I don't think I have an opinion right now whether that would have a more positive or negative effect. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
