Remember too that at the time (early- to mid-1970s) several English-speaking countries were converting, and it looked at the time that the USA was going to do so as well. Ford had signed legislation and things looked quite promising; I have a gas station highway map from the period (remember when they gave those away free?) that described the metric system and said that it was coming "soon". No doubt this movement in the USA influenced Canada, so the two countries would convert together.
Then along came the legislation that made it "voluntary" with no plan; along came Carter's appointment of both proponents and opponents to the US Metric board; along came incessant dithering; and, finally, along came Lynn Nofziger and Ronald Reagan to stop it entirely to get "government off the backs of the people." And nothing since. In a parliamentary system (Canada, UK) it is sometimes easier to get things done. Members of Congress, on the other hand, are easily swayed by highway contractor lobbyists, and even without that their basic operating system is programmed as follows: A. If I vote yes, will my opponents use this against me in the next election? B. Yes. A. Vote no. As a fruit fly's one goal is to pass on genetic material then die, a Member of Congress's one goal is to get re-elected. (There have been some notable exceptions, who have actually gotten some good done. But often they are from safe districts or states where their re-election is never in doubt.) Yes, I know there's a lot of "hidden metric" in the USA. But a visitor to this country would never notice it. Carleton ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephen Davis" <[email protected]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, April 7, 2010 10:04:15 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: [USMA:47069] RE: The "Europeanization" of the U.S.? --was Re: BBC debate about road signs It's all very well "letting metrication succeed on its own merits" but, when you a vocal, usually right-wing press presenting metrication as some sort of socialist plot to destroy their basic freedom to measure how they like, it becomes rather difficult to succeed on your own merits. The US has tried this for years with little real success. As with the UK, enforced legislation of metric is the only real answer. ----- Original Message ----- From: Stephen Humphreys To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 9:50 AM Subject: [USMA:47068] RE: The "Europeanization" of the U.S.? --was Re: BBC debate about road signs I think it's more important to get on and be friendly with your neighbours than looking for a prime minister that will be antagonistic towards your neighbour just to use measures as 'pseudo-weapon'. I can understand the sentiment - sort of - however it's vital in the current age (with new such different threats to our security and well-being) to get on with as many countries as possible and have a real 'internationalist' approach. Sometimes it's worth standing back a little and looking at the greater good. There are other ways to further metrication and the best way of all is to let it succeed on it's own merits (with some good marketing). It's not really a measurement thing - but cross country co-operation and friendliness is so much more important these days. IMHO. From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Subject: [USMA:47065] RE: The "Europeanization" of the U.S.? --was Re: BBC debate about road signs Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 18:43:33 +0100 Perhaps I can add how Canada's metrication was promoted, at least initially, back in the early/mid 1970s. There was (and to some extent still is) a great antipathy towards the USA, especially in the area of what was called the USA's "cultural imperialism", something that Canada's prime minister of the day, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, was passionate about. Going metric was one of the ways that Canada was able to express its own identity - something that is very hard to do when your next door neighbour is 10 times bigger than you, is your biggest trading partner and is the most powerful country on earth. Over the years, there has been some softening in Canada's stance towards the USA, and that has almost exactly coincided with Canada's partial regression towards imperial measures. Maybe we need another Trudeau..... John F-L ----- Original Message ----- From: Martin Vlietstra To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: Monday, April 05, 2010 8:52 PM Subject: [USMA:47049] RE: The "Europeanization" of the U.S.? --was Re: BBC debate about road signs By 1979 the metrication program in the UK had slowed down into bottom gear. In that year Mrs Thatcher became prime minister and one of the things on the agenda was the harmonization of units of measure across the EU. Mrs Thatcher’s antipathy towards the EU was well known and she used the failure to complete the metrication program as a symbol of defiance towards EU regulations. Intricate details of how VAT was collected meant nothing to the man in the street, but changing of everyday things like miles and pints were highly visible. When I compare this to South Africa – the bulk of the South African metrication program was complete by 1975 – South Africa had been a republic for over a decade and metrication was seen as being a step in the direction of the country asserting its independence – in particular South Africa did not have to wait for the British lead in everything. Pat might be able to mention whether or not there was a similar mood in Australia. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Trusten Sent: 05 April 2010 17:13 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:47048] The "Europeanization" of the U.S.? --was Re: BBC debate about road signs This is a 2006 program, hence the discussion of 2010 and supplementary indications. Perhaps the U.K. citizens can enlighten me on this point, but in that country and in mine (the U.S.), metrication seems to me to have become a political issue, not a technical one, when it is more technical than it is political. Right now, in the U.S., there is a great deal of complaining about President Obama seeking to "Europeanize" America with his political agenda. and I hate to see this argument spill over into the metrication discussion, as it seems to be doing in the UK . My counter to this is that the SI metric system does not belong to Europe alone. Far from it. It belongs to North America, South America, Asia, Africa, the Pacific states--- it is global . If we take into account the U.S. Metric Act of 1866, the Metre Convention of 1875, and the Metric Conversion Act of 1975, SI is the entire world's system of measurement, and its avoidance by a few countries should be seen a form of deprivation, not a form of exceptionalism, for those countries' citizens. The lad who asked what a pint was is part of our future. In the government publication Metrication In Australia, the Australian government stated its wish to be part of the future, not the past, when it launched metrication in the 1970s. As it was in Ireland in 2005, Metrication of road signs in the UK would be forward-looking, and for the long term. Paul Trusten,R.Ph. Public Relations Director U.S. Metric Association, Inc. www.metric.org ----- Original Message ----- From: Pat Naughtin To: U.S. Metric Association Sent: 05 April, 2010 02:27 Subject: [USMA:47044] BBC debate about road signs Dear All, I have just watched this completely bizarre BBC program called, 'Question Time' at http://www.youtube.com/user/UKMetric I say completely bizarre because we, in Australia, changed all of the road signs in this very large country in a single day (Sunday 1974 July 1). We did this with with minimum cost by simply applying stick on signs over all the old signs. Some approximations were made (1/4 mile became 400 metres for instance) and all the the signs were replaced and perhaps moved slightly in the normal order of maintenance plans. This completely bizarre BBC program illustrates clearly that the UK government has no plans to learn from others about how to go about the road sign change. Instead they appear to want to extend the discussion well beyond the 45 years (1965 to 2010) it has already taken so far – and there is no end in sight. I have said before and I will repeat here, ' A well planned and carried out metrication upgrade can be completed in a single day – a poorly planned attempt at metric conversion can take more than 100 years. In both cases the change to the metric system is inevitable '. Cheers, Pat Naughtin Author of the ebook, Metrication Leaders Guide, that you can obtain from http://metricationmatters.com/MetricationLeadersGuideInfo.html PO Box 305 Belmont 3216, Geelong , Australia Phone: 61 3 5241 2008 Metric system consultant, writer, and speaker, Pat Naughtin, has helped thousands of people and hundreds of companies upgrade to the modern metric system smoothly, quickly, and so economically that they now save thousands each year when buying, processing, or selling for their businesses. Pat provides services and resources for many different trades, crafts, and professions for commercial, industrial and government metrication leaders in Asia, Europe, and in the USA. Pat's clients include the Australian Government, Google, NASA, NIST, and the metric associations of Canada, the UK, and the USA. S ee http://www.metricationmatters.com for more metrication information, contact Pat at [email protected] or to get the free ' Metrication matters ' newsletter go to: http://www.metricationmatters.com/newsletter to subscribe. Get a new e-mail account with Hotmail – Free. Sign-up now.
