It appears to me that the conversion to metric in South Africa and Australia was successful because there was also a change in the product sizes to rounded metric. All a change in the FPLA would do would be to allow the dropping of English units. There is no requirement to do what the others have done and that is to change package sizes. The FMI is opposed to the change simply because they believe it means changing package sizes and not just having metric only on the labels.
My point is we already have metric on the labels. If some don't like the English units, they can ignore them and just look at the metric. A voluntary dropping of English units would still keep the sizes as they are. So instead of seeing a carton of ice creams marked as 1.75 quart (1.65 L), you would just see just the 1.65 L. It won't magically become 1.75 L or some other rounded liter amount. But as it is now it still says 1.65 L, but with the addition of 1.75 quart that you can easily ignore. What is essential to a metrication process is for the actual package sizes to change. If there is to be no change in package sizes, then what difference does it make if the English units remain on the label? Jerry ________________________________ From: Martin Vlietstra <vliets...@btinternet.com> To: jeremiahmacgre...@rocketmail.com; U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu> Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2009 3:07:13 AM Subject: RE: [USMA:43111] Re: true metrication is systemic Jerry, May I refer you to the following articles: http://www.metric.org.uk/Whatis/Australia.aspx http://www.metric.org.uk/Whatis/southafrica.aspx Both give the same message – removal of Imperial (English) units is an essential part of the metrication process. (BTW, I must declare an interest in the second article). ________________________________ From:owner-u...@colostate.edu [mailto:owner-u...@colostate.edu] On Behalf Of Jeremiah MacGregor Sent: 21 February 2009 03:10 To: U.S. Metric Association Subject: [USMA:43111] Re: true metrication is systemic Every package that I encounter has a metric description on it. Isn't that sufficient? If by chance the English units were removed, what would be gained? Jerry ________________________________ From:STANLEY DOORE < stan.do...@verizon.net > To: U.S. Metric Association <usma@colostate.edu> Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 4:50:01 PM Subject: [USMA:43041] Re: true metrication is systemic Paul et al: Absolutely metrication needs a decision from the top; however, visibility and use is essential to make it work. Packaging and road signs are visible and used by most people and this would make people familiar with and learn metric. Those are two highly visible and useful applications which confront people daily and which would stimulate and maintain the conversion process. Yes, a procedure is necessary and packaging and road signs would be an excellent way for people to learn metric in an every day environment. Metric is already used extensively below the public surface in the US , however, most people don't know it or are not concerned about it. The SI and metric needs to be brought into the open. Stan Doore ----- Original Message ----- From:Paul Trusten To:U.S. Metric Association Sent:Monday, February 16, 2009 9:04 AM Subject:[USMA:43032] true metrication is systemic Stan et al., this is about procedure. Metrication is not a bottoms-up process; it is systemic. Victory for metrication is to be found among our leaders, who have to get together and set it in motion. Road signs cannot function as mere billboards for metrication, but rather, as the results of metrication. Once the starting gun for real metrication is fired, and the race is on for the 10-year transition period, we shall have an ever-increasing number of visible and audible signs of it, as weather reports report wind speeds in kilometers per hour and temperatures in degrees Celsius, available office space is advertised in square meters on signs, and those pesky media style guides are revised to specify the use of metric units only, so that every measurement we read about is stated in SI metric units. Metric "will win" when metrication starts in earnest. I think that, for those of us who want a metric America , real metrication will be very satisfying, because it will be truly ubiquitous. We will eventually get to that point where refrigerator magnets that happen to be thermometers will be Celsius-only thermometers, and when you go into a dollar store looking for a ruler, it will be have millimeter scales on both edges. With true metrication, U.S. customary units will go the way of the 33-1/3 RPM long-playing record. Paul ----- Original Message ----- From:STANLEY DOORE To:U.S. Metric Association Sent:16 February, 2009 07:27 Subject:[USMA:43031] Re: More companies primed to pounce on metric-only labeling Road signs are an integral part of changing to metric because they are so visible and an integral part of all our lives. change them, weather reporting and product display in grocery stores and metric will win. Stan Doore ----- Original Message ----- From:Brian J White To:U.S. Metric Association Sent:Sunday, February 15, 2009 11:53 PM Subject:[USMA:43022] Re: More companies primed to pounce on metric-only labeling You know me Paul...I wasn't disputing anything. It just made me think. Did the DOT rules relax over the past few years on the speedo km/h requirement? At 20:47 2009-02-15, Paul Trusten wrote: Changing road signs can only be a small part of metrication. What about the speedometers, odometers, driver training, federal and state traffic regulations, statements of the heights of tractor trailers in meters so the drivers will understand the meters-only clearance signs that will replaces the ones that now read in feet? If there are jobs to be held for metrication, they will be created in many areas of our lives, and each metric transition must be coordinated with the others. There will be jobs in signage, sure, but there will also be jobs in writing new regulations, jobs providing metric training, jobs in designing new products or changes in old products. Once the Nation's leadership makes the decision to go metric, all of these things will follow, e.g., there would be a DOT requirement that, by a certain date, all vehicles made in the U.S. will display speedometers that read in kilometers per hour only, and odometers that accumulate kilometers only. Metrication is all or nothing. It's a life process; a living thing. ----- Original Message ----- From: Brian J White To: U..S. Metric Association Sent: 15 February, 2009 22:29 Subject: [USMA:43020] Re: More companies primed to pounce on metric-only labeling What gets me about sign changing, is....whatever happened to the DOT requirement that cars must be sold with both km/h and mph on the speedo? Mercedes over the past 3-4 years seems to be getting away without it...they are mph only it looks like. I know GM has numbers only with a legend that switches between mph and km/h, but the Mercedes cars look to be mph only all the time. Makes for a suck time when driving to Canada I'm sure. My wife's old Honda Civic (I hated that car.) had both mph and km/h markings, but only MPH illuminated at night. Talk about a bozo design feature right there..... I tried to talk you out of the Honda again Nat, but to no avail. :) At 19:36 2009-02-15, STANLEY DOORE wrote:  The NIST has drafted legislation to provide for metric only product labeling. If Congress would pass it and the President sign it, there would be a great move to go all metric. If ALL people would contact their Congressional representatives, then perhaps something would happen. No single organization can do it alone. However, most companies want to go metric and many already have gone metric like the auto industry has. With the current stimulus bill recently passed and it's called a jobs bill, it would be appropriate to have all road signs changed to metric very quickly. Stan Doore
