Just providing that as an example. The same points hold true for temperature. Why is it more simple and more uniform from the perspective of a society that is mostly non metric? What problems would switching solve that people actually deal with on a semi-regular basis? I ask this because unless there are such problems what is the motivation to switch? Why should we?
Those questions should be answered as a whole. And metric systems is simpler overall - there is no debate about it. I don't think it makes any sense to switch to it only partially. The only reason US doesn't switch is inertia (i.e. habit), and not concerns like "how it can improve things".
>The only reason US doesn't switch is inertia (i.e. habit), and not concerns like "how it can improve things"
You say that like they're two different things. No one does anything just because. The benefits of switching have to outweigh the benefits of staying the same, one of which is always going to be "it's already done". Why bother reversing inertia and switching unless it improves things? You aren't articulating why the change should be made, you're just asserting that it should.
And just saying "It's simpler" means nothing, because being simple isn't a benefit all on it's own. Does it being simpler mean X number of increased work hours because we aren't wasting time converting? Does it being simpler mean Y fewer accidents on the road or in the workplace? These are reasons, not just "it's simpler".
US was pushing the effort in the past, with government obviously convinced that benefits are worth it. But inertia was too much, and they ditched active pushing in order not to risk their public image. Since then it's kind of formally "on the plate", but in practice it's barely moving anywhere.
Yes, I understand all that, but it's still not an answer to the question of what, given the facts as they are, the benefits are that make it worth going against that inertia.
(Also: The only discussion on potential benefits in your link is sourced by a dead link)
>And just saying "It's simpler" means nothing, because being simple isn't a benefit all on it's own. Does it being simpler mean X number of increased work hours because we aren't wasting time converting? Does it being simpler mean Y fewer accidents on the road or in the workplace? These are reasons, not just "it's simpler".
What are the tangible benefits to people's lives that "uniformity" would bring? And do you think they outweigh the benefits of continuing to use our existing system? Why or why not?
