Re: Metric Time (was Re: Why not 13 months? (Was La Systeme Metrique))

Kai Henningsen (
16 Oct 1995 22:04:00 +0200 (DaveHatunen) wrote on 15.10.95 in <>:

> In article <>,
> Kai Henningsen <> wrote:

> >In fact, I can't remember a single metric unit used except sometimes as an
> >afterthought ("oh yes, these n inches are n*2.54 mm"). (Umm, except for
> >products produced outside the US, even if under a US name. Like, you know,
> >Coca Cola.)
> And what are some of some of those products? Are they products where
> tools would be required, or products where it really doesn't matter,
> like beverages and foods?

Well, the only goods I *know* of that are produced outside the US, but
under a US name, are stuff like beverages and foods. There may well be
others, but I don't know about those.

And why do you think that it "doesn't really matter" with these?

Anyway, my point was that all products I know about that are produced in
the US, *don't* use metric measures, or only as an afterthought. That
definitely includes those "where it really matters" by whatever

> >The "interesting" result of the US state of affairs is that TV sizes are
> >measured in cm, while computer monitor screens are measured in inches ...
> >ridiculous.
> And European automobile tire rims are measured in inches. What's your
> point?

I don't know anything about automobile tires, as I don't drive, except
that by German law, the profile has to have a certain minimal height while
in use - which is measured in mm.

The point, of course, is that your assertion, that the US has gone metric
in international trade, doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

> Hey, When literature is easy, it's not very good literature.

That's a matter of opinion, mine being that when literature isn't easy,
it's bad.

However, I certainly didn't claim that reading english literature isn't
easy. I claimed that those dumb measures detract.

In fact, that's just the same for old German literature, which also uses
lots of miles and stuff. I don't like it any better there. (And it doesn't
keep me from reading those, either.)

> >In short, it has ramifications for *my* personal life.

That's the point, of course. Saying "it's just in the personal life of US
citizens" is simply not true.

> >You count for something like 5% of the total population, if I got the
> >right numbers. I've no numbers for things like GNP, but I expect the
> >figure's a lot higher. Even more so with nuclear arsenal or space flight
> >capability. Other aspects probably somewhere in between.
> Ah, now how could only 5% "hold up the rest of the world" unless they
> have dominance. You can't have it both ways.

I don't see why not. One in twenty is often enough for (temporarily)
holding something up, no dominance required. And note that I said it's a
lot more than 5% in other respects.

Hell, you should see German politics. It's traditional over here for
parties that get 5% of the votes to hold everything up. It's often called
"the tail wagging with the dog". Dominance? ROTFL ...

> >That's certainly enough to hold the rest of it up. Not forever, though.
> Make up your mind.

I have.


>>> distributes mail bombs. <<<
Bang: major_backbone!!kai