US going metric?

Dave Smith wrote:
alohacyberian wrote:


I don't think that I missed the point at all. The point was his boss's
comment that
you are number one and everyone else should do it you way.


The boss was only speaking for himself and not espousing any accepted
doctrine. If you are under the impression that all bosses in the United
States would make such a statement, you are mistaken. KM

Oh silly me. When I read "we are number one" I had no idea he was using the
royal "we".


The point you're missing, that alohacyberian made, I've made and others have
made, is that you're using an anecdote to make your points. Nex

Frank F. Matthews wrote:
Carlos Rodriguez wrote:

I think that you are getting someone exposed to too much right wing UK
politics. They tend to view the EU as the sole driving force for
metrication. FFM


To move the point away from metrification to the more general sphere, there is
a tradition of perceiving European governments as generally more centralist
and the US government less so, relatively speaking. That perception was
popularized way back by Alexis de Tocqueville, and continues to the present.

As for "right wing UK politics", from my numerous conversations with Europeans
of many stripes, it's not only conservatives who feel a bit dismayed by the
EU's centralist 'decrees' concerning so many different subjects.

This doesn't include metrification, obviously.

Still, a centralist attitude may not have been a complete stranger to the
metrification process long before Europe became a political entity, so the
original point wasn't necessarily devoid of any worth. Nex

"Pat Norton" wrote in message
...
alohacyberian wrote
As for whether the United States embraces metric,
that's up to the people and in many instances they don't
embrace the metric system. And so far no authority has forced them to
do so.

You may be assuming a free market. The Federal budget alone is two
trillion dollars. Government spending distorts the market directly,
and regulations distort it indirectly. There are plenty of examples of
authorities that force particular units on citizens and businesses.


Sorry, but, you're changing the subject and avoiding the issue which can be
seen in the Subject line: U.S. going metric? Yes, and no, but no authority
has forced them to do so. KM
--
(-:alohacyberian:-) At my website there are 3000 live cameras or
visit NASA, play games, read jokes, send greeting cards & connect
to CNN news, NBA, the White House, Academy Awards or learn all
about Hawaii, Israel and mo http://keith.martin.home.att.net/

"Alan Pollock" wrote in message
...
Frank F. Matthews wrote:
Carlos Rodriguez wrote:

I think that you are getting someone exposed to too much right wing UK
politics. They tend to view the EU as the sole driving force for
metrication. FFM


To move the point away from metrification to the more general sphere, there
is
a tradition of perceiving European governments as generally more centralist
and the US government less so, relatively speaking. That perception was
popularized way back by Alexis de Tocqueville, and continues to the present.

As for "right wing UK politics", from my numerous conversations with
Europeans
of many stripes, it's not only conservatives who feel a bit dismayed by the
EU's centralist 'decrees' concerning so many different subjects.

This doesn't include metrification, obviously.

Still, a centralist attitude may not have been a complete stranger to the
metrification process long before Europe became a political entity, so the
original point wasn't necessarily devoid of any worth. Nex


The whole point of a common system of weights and measures is that it is
*common*. If you call that "centralist attitude", so be it. However, since
the US uses a common standard within its borders, it must no doubt be
equally centralist...

Regarding "dismay" in Europe: it seems to me that if the US, with a
population of 290 million, uses standards (with some notable exceptions such
as petrol) for obvious good reasons, so should Europe with its 350 million
people. If one European state (say, the UK), wanted to keep out of it, it
would be similar to, say, New York or Oklahoma opting out of using the
standards being used in the rest of country.

Carlos Rodriguez wrote:

The whole point of a common system of weights and measures is that it is
*common*. If you call that "centralist attitude", so be it. However, since
the US uses a common standard within its borders, it must no doubt be
equally centralist...

The common system of [insert preference] is the final result. The centralist
attitude describes the *process*.


Regarding "dismay" in Europe: it seems to me that if the US, with a
population of 290 million, uses standards (with some notable exceptions such
as petrol) for obvious good reasons, so should Europe with its 350 million
people. If one European state (say, the UK), wanted to keep out of it, it
would be similar to, say, New York or Oklahoma opting out of using the
standards being used in the rest of country.


Dictating to a country/region how their beer should or should not be brewed
(for instance) will bring-up the old question of local rights.

In other words, where is that dividing line between between local autonomy and
general imperative?

That's the interesting question to my way of thinking, because it's all
bound-up in *context*, each and every time.

As the results are rarely obvious beforehand except in extreme cases, the
decision-making process necessarily gains importance. How much input is there?
How fair is it? How close to the people is the process, or how authoritarian?
Are there just small groups of appointed officials making the decisions, or is
the process more broad-based? Once decisions are made, how flexible or how
brittle (yes/no) is the ratification process?

Luckily, the devil - yes - is in the details. Dumb ideology step aside;
Reality coming through. Nex

Carlos Rodriguez wrote:
"Alan Pollock" wrote in message
...
Frank F. Matthews wrote:

Carlos Rodriguez wrote:

I think that you are getting someone exposed to too much right wing UK
politics. They tend to view the EU as the sole driving force for
metrication. FFM

To move the point away from metrification to the more general sphere, there is
a tradition of perceiving European governments as generally more centralist
and the US government less so, relatively speaking. That perception was
popularized way back by Alexis de Tocqueville, and continues to the present.

As for "right wing UK politics", from my numerous conversations with Europeans
of many stripes, it's not only conservatives who feel a bit dismayed by the
EU's centralist 'decrees' concerning so many different subjects.

This doesn't include metrification, obviously.

Still, a centralist attitude may not have been a complete stranger to the
metrification process long before Europe became a political entity, so the
original point wasn't necessarily devoid of any worth. Nex

The whole point of a common system of weights and measures is that it is
*common*. If you call that "centralist attitude", so be it. However, since
the US uses a common standard within its borders, it must no doubt be
equally centralist...

Regarding "dismay" in Europe: it seems to me that if the US, with a
population of 290 million, uses standards (with some notable exceptions such
as petrol) for obvious good reasons, so should Europe with its 350 million
people. If one European state (say, the UK), wanted to keep out of it, it
would be similar to, say, New York or Oklahoma opting out of using the
standards being used in the rest of country.

But the US doesn't require a "standard". It is quite legal to use and
write contracts in either metric or traditional units in the US. Now,
the meaning of the units is "standard", but I doubt that is what you mean.

As to the reference to the UK. Since most of Europe has been using
metric since it was imposed by Napoleon a complaint about Brussels
bureaucrats is likely to come from the UK.

FFM

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004 18:17:16 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
wrote:

But the US doesn't require a "standard". It is quite legal to use and
write contracts in either metric or traditional units in the US. Now,
the meaning of the units is "standard", but I doubt that is what you mean.

In fact, a private contract could be written requiring the use of
the Potrzebie system of weights and measurements.


************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

alohacyberian wrote:
Well, if a road sign were to read "Gotham 167 kilometers" and American
speedometers, odometers, fuel consumption computers and trip computers are
all in miles, some people might feel more comfortable with the old system.

New cars have both MPH and KPH on the speedometer, right?

Granted, the odometer remains an issue - except for digital ones which
presumably can change back and forth without much effort.

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: http://travel.u.nu/

alohacyberian wrote:
It isn't just America that has that mentality. Many countries have
declined to go along with world standards that have supposedly been set.
Way back when it was determined that automobiles should drive on the right
hand side of the road, much of the British Empire declined to go along and
to this day the U.K., India, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, etc. decline
to drive on the right side of the road. What do you suppose that costs the
automotive industry?

I wonder if there will ever be another switchover like Sweden in 1967?

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: http://travel.u.nu/

Zane wrote:
Has our use of old units impacted you personally in any adverse way?

It's somewhat wasteful to spend the effort teaching and calibrating for two
separate systems - one for internal use and one for interaction with anyone
outside the USA.

This is not a huge issue but it does come at a cost. The cost of a
transition of course would be high, but in the long run I expect it would
pay off.

miguel
--
Hundreds of travel photos from around the world: http://travel.u.nu/