>From my experience of comparing South Africa and the United Kingdom, you require a co-ordinated change-over - to prevent profiteering and to ensure that the message gets across the entire country to everybody at the same time. A co-ordinated system should be managed by the Federal Government, though some of the larger states could possibly manage their own. If the Federal Government is unwilling to take the lead, then large states like Texas and California could go it alone but New York would have to co-ordinate with New Jersey, while it would make sense for the New England states to co-ordinate themselves.
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Victor Jockin Sent: 02 March 2009 17:52 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:43326] Re: true metrification is systemic I don't disagree with any of what you said. I guess what I mean by stealth is, for example, if conventional units started to disappear from packaging, and if store unit pricing labels started to use metric units, would it even make the local news? Most people would scarcely notice. But still, metric units would increasing creep into public language and thought as a result. For that kind of change, a big public education initiative would be counterproductive and needlessly create resistance. For road signs, of course you're right about truckers and clearance, that's critical, and we don't want to completely blind side the public. But neither do you want to give them a big public education initiative and a 10 year conversion window. Just think of Americans who drive to Canada and vice versa. Is there chaos and confusion? That tells you right there how much notice and how much public education would be necessary ... virtually none. It's the protracted discussion of conversion, and dual unit signage, that helped sink road sign conversion in the 70s. -------------------------------------------------- From: "John M. Steele" <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 5:50 AM To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:43325] Re: true metrification is systemic > > I think stealth will simply increase resistance. In some cases, it will > be dangerous as well. Public "buy-in" isn't a requirement (although > Congresscritters would have to show a lot of backbone to pass something > the public doesn't approve of), but on some things prior notification, > planning and education is essential. > > Relative to speed limits, FMVSS101 needs to be modified to require, not > just permit, km/h marking and have legibility standards for it. My car > has virtually unreadable km/h markings, and some cars have none as it is > currently optional. > > Second the public would need to understand change is coming, when it is > coming, and the relationship between MPH and km/h. Some Americans who > regularly visit Canada and Mexico have some familiarity with it, many > don't. > > > Clearance heights for bridges are also extremely important (mostly to > truckers, as we have few of the VERY low clearances common in the UK). > For these, I would support mandatory dual marking for a few years. > > Some road signs, if not understood, only inconvenience the driver, e.g. > distance to a (fairly distant) city. Others can make the driver who > doesn't understand be a hazard to others, such as speed limits, clearance > heights, load limits. > > Changing these without adequate education is irresponsible and dangerous. > --- On Mon, 3/2/09, Victor Jockin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> From: Victor Jockin <[email protected]> >> Subject: [USMA:43324] Re: true metrification is systemic >> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> >> Cc: [email protected] >> Date: Monday, March 2, 2009, 12:38 AM >> I agree with Alan's central point that stealth measures, >> done without fanfare or extensive public education, are the >> mostly likely ways to succeed in the US today. I disagree >> that road signs can't also be switched in an executive >> quick-strike, without waiting for a public buy in that will >> never come (they'll buy in a few weeks post switch), but >> that's perhaps a secondary point. >> > >
