The firms that did not metricate domestically simply had the goods they wanted produced in metric made elsewhere in the world where metric is accepted and not rejected.
Why should someone spend time and money to metricate a domestic company only to meet resistance when it is simpler just to close the factory and have the goods made in metric somewhere else? This is more beneficial economically and a win-win situation for the company doing it and the country getting the jobs. If you know your workers and you know that any attempt to metricate the company will be met with with resistance which could waste your money and efforts, would you try to convert or would you simply look for another means to make your parts and goods metric? The auto industry is big and they could make it happen a lot easier then a smaller company where resistance can hurt the bottom line. The simplest and easiest way for others to convert is to simply close the factory go somewhere where there is no hatred of things metric. Metrication is meant to benefit the industry at both the worker's and consumer's expense. Is it any wonder our living standard is bought with borrowed money and not earned money? Jerry ________________________________ From: John M. Steele <[email protected]> To: U.S. Metric Association <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, April 11, 2009 11:11:05 AM Subject: [USMA:44580] Re: cover letter of 1971 U.S. metric report If "slow as molasses" is mistaken for "deliberately carefully," at least we avoided rapidly and recklessly. Some effort was made at the time to educate every schoolchild. However, for the most part, there was no plan, no buy-in, no progress, except for some firms who had logical reasons of their own to go metric and did so. Most of those firms refuse to be advocates for the process (mine included) and indeed conceal their metricness under a few token Customary conversions for customers. Mum's the word. With no backbone and no plan at the government level, metrication is completely stalled out in the US. --- On Sat, 4/11/09, John Woelflein <[email protected]> wrote: From: John Woelflein <[email protected]> Subject: [USMA:44579] Re: cover letter of 1971 U.S. metric report To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Cc: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Date: Saturday, April 11, 2009, 10:46 AM The intent was great, but what happened? Politics. I have a huge sinking feeling about US metrication, like I am aboard the Titanic. I used to believe that, by this time, our country would be very nearly complete in its metric conversion program. Now I'm afraid it will never happen in my lifetime. On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 3:23 AM, Paul Trusten <[email protected]> wrote: The late Commerce Secretary Maurice Stans' words are, I believe, an excellent guide for the Nation to follow today (attached; may require magnification). Paul Trusten, R.Ph. Public Relations Director U.S. Metric Association, Inc. www.metric.org 3609 Caldera Blvd. Apt. 122 Midland, Texas 79707-2872 US +1(432)528-7724 [email protected]
