posted on Feb, 19 2009 @ 01:14 AM
They do teach it in schools. Everyone hates it. Few understand it. That's how I ended up doing tutoring sessions in the library after school. It's
not as easy as just producing a bunch of commercials like the did with DTV (mistake). There's a lot more to it than just that. Aside from switching
the roadsigns over, you'd have to change all the cars because most cars now don't switch between both. I know my fathers Buick does, but it's some
silly luxury model from a few years back.
I don't really think it would create jobs, we already have road workers. The only accomplishment that would come out of FORCING the nation to make
the unnecessary switch is this:
The majority of people would be heavily annoyed.
There's a reason that this didn't work in the 70's.
People hate it because they don't understand it, which really isn't fair to metric because metric is so much easier.
Second, most cars have mi/h and km/h on the speedometers. The people without it would have to get new speedometers. I'm sure the government would
give out coupons just like they did with the DTV receivers. (Not that I'm here to debate this, but how is DTV a mistake? It frees up parts of the
analog band for emergency services.)
People would be annoyed for a small period of time, and not even everyone. Science teachers, math teachers, engineers, doctors, etc. would all be very
comfortable. And after a few weeks of actually using metric people will find that it's much easier not to have to deal with fractions or 50,000
Yes, there is a reason it didn't work, but not because metric was unpopular. Back then people were all for it. Metric failed because Reagan dissolved
the metric board and because the metric board itself didn't plan very well. They knew the goal, but they didn't actually know how to achieve it.
They didn't say, "We're going to be metric in 10 years and here's how it's going happen." That's pretty much where it stopped.
[edit on 19-2-2009 by Totakeke]