NationStates Jolt Archive

The mandating of the metric system should be reversed by the United Nations! What if we want to use the Imperial system? Should we not as a sovereign nation be able to make that choice for ourselves without Big Brother trying to replace out quarts with liters? Repeal 24!

The mandating of the metric system should be reversed by the United Nations! What if we want to use the Imperial system? Should we not as a sovereign nation be able to make that choice for ourselves without Big Brother trying to replace out quarts with liters? Repeal 24!
Its considered polite to link to your proposal and post it here so we can look at it. If you want to know how to, just read the thread Lazy links to proposals.

And no. Why? Because if the UN is doing to deal with 30,000 nations there should be at least some common points of reference. If I start writing a resolution that says "We must ensure there are hospitals within two echlongs of a nuclear reactors" every single person is going to say "what the hell is an echlong?" and they would be right. Where as if I say "200Km" you will all know.

To put it another way - my national language is Tulan. Imagine if I were permitted to submit resolutions in my language. Can you picture the chaos if all 30,000 nations did that?

The original resolution states

I propose that all countries within the United Nations be converted to the Metric standard.

Which is clearly discriminatory against imperial power (yes, I know that is a terrible pun)

And quite how you convert a country to the metric standard is another matter; it should say all countries within the United Nations' measurements be converted to the Metric standard

It's poorly written, doesn't take into account many things (e.g. is Cobdenia's undecimalised currency in violation?), and anyway imperial measurements teach our kids how to do complicated maths; working out how many centimetres there are in four metres is far easier than working out how many ounces there are in four tons.

The original resolution states



Which is clearly discriminatory against imperial power (yes, I know that is a terrible pun)

And quite how you convert a country to the metric standard is another matter; it should say all countries within the United Nations' measurements be converted to the Metric standard

It's poorly written, doesn't take into account many things (e.g. is Cobdenia's undecimalised currency in violation?), and anyway imperial measurements teach our kids how to do complicated maths; working out how many centimetres there are in four metres is far easier than working out how many ounces there are in four tons.


But it does prevent people being ripped off (or just looking stupid) when they go to other nations. And as a standard for writing resolutions, it is second to none.

My feeling is that whilst the original resolution may not have been great, Gruenberg invested a considerable amount of time and money in converting to the metric system. If it were repealed, we would have no desire to leap back to now outdated means of mensuration for the hell of it. Nonetheless, if other nations wish to make the effort of reverting back to other systems, then we would understand that position, and would probably support, although not vocally, a repeal.

It would really not affect Habardia at all, as we would continue to use the metric system anyway. As for the other arguments, if you can't find a way to teach math to children other than the measurements system, than perhaps we need an education resolution ;) . And I do believe a homogenised system of measurements is a great thing to have between memeber nations. So no repeal. That said, all this asks is that the metric system be used. If you want to continue use of the Imperiial one, then do so. No one is stopping you, as long as your citizens also know metric.

it would be really detrimental to countries if they were to revert back to imperial or other measurments. besides the cost factor, there could also be the breakdown in trade in that it might be easier and cheaper for countries to simply not export to non-metric countries. this issue is not the kind that national sovereignty can be called in, because for trade and communication a standard has been set. unfortunatly for those that prefer the imperial system, the metric one got adopted first.

As much as the imperial system is easy for me, I agree with resolution 24. If everyone has a different system, it's going to be hell to figure out measurements.

The mandating of the metric system should be reversed by the United Nations! What if we want to use the Imperial system? Should we not as a sovereign nation be able to make that choice for ourselves without Big Brother trying to replace out quarts with liters? Repeal 24!

i support you on this point, the use of imperial measurements is a decision to be decided by sovereign nations

We do not need to be legislated within an inch of our lives

i support you on this point, the use of imperial measurements is a decision to be decided by sovereign nations

We do not need to be legislated within an inch of our lives

But you have to admit, for easing international communication, having a standard system is a lot easier?

Maybe if it said that the Metric system must be used either alone or alongside another system would get round that problem. So goods could be labelled in both Imperial and Metric, or something and metric....

Maybe if it said that the Metric system must be used either alone or alongside another system would get round that problem. So goods could be labelled in both Imperial and Metric, or something and metric....

I don't see that it doesn't say that (if you will excuse the phrasing). It says everyone should be converted to the metric system, but doesn't say you can't keep your old system as well.

Maybe if it said that the Metric system must be used either alone or alongside another system would get round that problem. So goods could be labelled in both Imperial and Metric, or something and metric....
whilst that is a noble idea, and i agree with Pallatium's statement, in areas where their 'imperial' system is a bit trickier, manufacturers would probably stick to the one labling system, and that would be metric because it would be good for export

As the Dom of Hsaur i support the effort to repeal this offensive resolution.
toward this i make two points.
1) The measurement system used WITHIN a country should be controled by theat country. The forced implementaion of the metric system over all peoples is ridiculous. My own people balk at such a move. They do not feel that the learning of this "new" system is important or even worthy of any attention.
2) I would support the use of the metric system as a WORLDWIDE "easing" aide. But that is not what this proposal does. If it had mandated the use of the metric system for INTERNATIONAL trade and other INTERNATIONAL endevors, that would be one thing. But this resolution effects the INTERNAL workings and laws of each country.
To mandate that ALL people must learn this system not only is expensive, but also is insulting to those countries that have developed their own system. And to suggest that our governments are not intelligent enough to translate any measurement from the metric system into our own, induvidual, systems of measurements, is even more insulting.

We don't see anything fundamentally wrong with the resolution enough to vote for a repeal. In fact we support it completely.

Giordano,
Senior UN representative,
The 1.75cm New World,
Delegate to The Order of The Valiant States

But you have to admit, for easing international communication, having a standard system is a lot easier?

Is ease your concern? Do you know that it's much easier to kill a criminal rather messily that to try to rehabilitate them? In many cases it's easier to lie and defraud than to tell the truth and take responsibility. Rather than worrying about doing what's easy or convenient, perhaps we can try to do what's appropriate.

Minister of UN Affairs
Edward Jones

Is ease your concern? Do you know that it's much easier to kill a criminal rather messily that to try to rehabilitate them? In many cases it's easier to lie and defraud than to tell the truth and take responsibility. Rather than worrying about doing what's easy or convenient, perhaps we can try to do what's appropriate.

Just remember, sweetheart, they spilt a litre of your milk.

Rose,
UN representative,
The Black New World

Why would you want your own system?
Honestly the only country that would benefit from that would be a country that didnt want any international contacts which dont seam to fit on a UN-member country.

For example there have been extremly costly accidents in the space industry because two diffrent systems was being used, scientists in Europe had done som calculations on the landing of a satellite, they then sent these to scientists in US whom where to implement these in the satellite. What they didnt figure though was that it was in the metric and they entered them as imperial. This caused the satellite to crash costing the space industry millions and a long times of work. Thats the reason we should all use the same system, no matter if its the metric or imperial or some other system.

We firmly express our objection to this repeal in its effort to remove this necessary standard. We hope that the members of the UN see why this repeal would hurt international cooperation and the exchange of information over borders.


Minister of Foreign Affairs
Bjorn Karlsson,
Bjorkbacken

But it does prevent people being ripped off (or just looking stupid) when they go to other nations. And as a standard for writing resolutions, it is second to none.

By which argument, if the game's rules allowed such a change, there should also be a single currency... but if the rules did allow proposals on that mattter then how many nations do you really think would vote for THAT change?

Why would you want your own system?
Honestly the only country that would benefit from that would be a country that didnt want any international contacts which dont seam to fit on a UN-member country.

We're used to our own system.
Most of our trade is with a group of neighbouring countries who aren't in the UN, and all of them still use the same system that we would prefer instead of the metric one.

it would be really detrimental to countries if they were to revert back to imperial or other measurments. besides the cost factor, there could also be the breakdown in trade in that it might be easier and cheaper for countries to simply not export to non-metric countries. this issue is not the kind that national sovereignty can be called in, because for trade and communication a standard has been set. unfortunatly for those that prefer the imperial system, the metric one got adopted first.

In our case the changeover has only just begun, due to our recent entry into the UN, so changing back would be very easy. As for trade, apart from the fact that a lot of our external trade is with a group of non-UN countries who also don't use the metric system, there's another resolution which mandates that all exported foodstuffs must be labelled in all of the national languages of all of the countries in which they're being sold so adding the weights in a few different systems of measurement too shouldn't be that much extra work...
And anyway, so what if it is slightly detrimental to the countries concerned? Aren't we entitled to decide whether to let our economies suffer slightly in order to mantain our traditions? There are nations out there whose environmental policies have FAR worse effects on their economies than this would on ours, and nobody talks of forcing them to change their ways...

And anyway, so what if it is slightly detrimental to the countries concerned? Aren't we entitled to decide whether to let our economies suffer slightly in order to mantain our traditions? There are nations out there whose environmental policies have FAR worse effects on their economies than this would on ours, and nobody talks of forcing them to change their ways...
Okay, I get the first two points. But the second? We've done quite a bit for the environment if there is something we've missed your free to bring it to our attention. Our action on other issues has little to do with our action on the metric system.

We use both metric and imperial on labels and we feel having a UN wide standard is useful from a proposal-writing standpoint. Six kilograms of cheese isn't the same as 13 pounds and, because manufacturers don’t like fiddling with decimals (OOC: try buying UK, US and metric knitting needles), there will be a discrepancy.

I admit we wouldn't be too enthusiastic to support this now but I think it isn't doing enough harm (compared to good) to repeal it.

Rose,
UN representative,
The Black New World

kirisubo has both imperial and metric measures in place, and this was before they joined the UN.

Metric weights makes sense if you are exporting since its a common standard round the world and since it looks like the current vote is going to pass it looks like we'll be seeing the export of quite a few kilos of fine Yeldan cheese.

kirisubo has both imperial and metric measures in place, and this was before they joined the UN.

Metric weights makes sense if you are exporting since its a common standard round the world and since it looks like the current vote is going to pass it looks like we'll be seeing the export of quite a few kilos of fine Yeldan cheese.
I presume that you meant to say import instead of export there, because after all only Yelda can export Yeldan cheese.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

PS Hey Yelda, can I get a refill on that basket of fine Yeldan cheese you sent me?

Osbalstium hasn't been a member of the United Nations very long. In fact, we're a relatively new country. That having been said, Every time I go throught the list of proposals, there seems to be a motion to repeal UNR 24. It would seem, then, that there's the desire out there to eliminate 24. The question is, really, how to get enough endorsements to bring it to the floor for a vote.

The Protectorate of Osbalstium's Delegation to the United Nations is willing to draft a new resolution. What should it say? What arguments should be made? The other thing I noted about these "Repeal 24" motions is that they're not argued well enough. Basically, and I mean no disrespect, the arguments boil down to either "It's not fair," or "We like ours better." Well that's great and all, but that doesn't meet our need for a tight argument to defeat UNR 24. Thank you for your consideration, and Osbalstium looks forward to fruitful cooperation with other member nations.

His Excellency Owen Gimell, K.P.O.
Secretariat of Foreign Affairs
Chandos Office Building
Osbalstiumensis, Osbalstium

Okay, I get the first two points. But the second? We've done quite a bit for the environment if there is something we've missed your free to bring it to our attention. Our action on other issues has little to do with our action on the metric system.

We use both metric and imperial on labels and we feel having a UN wide standard is useful from a proposal-writing standpoint. Six kilograms of cheese isn't the same as 13 pounds and, because manufacturers don’t like fiddling with decimals (OOC: try buying UK, US and metric knitting needles), there will be a discrepancy.


My point was that many nations make policy decisions [for one reason or another, with environmentalism one of the main reasons that I've noticed] which have far more detrimental effects on their economies than a switch back from the metric system to local traditions would probably do, so that The Lynx Alliance's suggestion that those possible economic dfficulties of switching was a good reason for continuing to insist on everybody using metric units seemed a bit inadequate to me unless we're going to insist that everybody MUST take ALL decisions on the basis of maximising their economies...

Alas, St Edmund's courts decided that Resolution 24's language about "converting" to the metric system would have to meant a total shift rather than just adopting it [i]alongside our traditional system.


Oh, and there's one problem with Resolution #24 that nobody seems to have mentioned so far (unless it was back in the original debate about that proposal, before I became active in this world): It seems to mandate an immediate conversion, with no time allowed for educating the members of any populations who were previously unfamiliar with the metric system in how that works, which would cause serious problems in the countries involved...

Oh, and there's one problem with Resolution #24 that nobody seems to have mentioned so far (unless it was back in the original debate about that proposal, before I became active in this world): It seems to mandate an immediate conversion, with no time allowed for educating the members of any populations who were previously unfamiliar with the metric system in how that works, which would cause serious problems in the countries involved...

Well - no. Because it doesn't say "total conversion" or "complete conversion" or "do it now conversion".

Take the UK (ooc somewhat) - when it swtiched from pounds, shillings and pence to pounds and pence, it didn't do it at once - it introduced the new coins, along side the old ones, then phased out the old ones when people were used to the new ones (so I am told - I wasn't around when it was going on!). And although the UK does most things in a metric system, there are still things it doesn't do (pints, miles etc).


And take Pallatium (back in character) - back in ther day there were 50 florins in a guilder, and five weslets in a florin (so 250 westlets in a guilder, obviously). Since we joined the UN, we have introduced the New Florin, which is worth half what an old florin was, and we have more or less phased out the westlet (simply because the conversion would be around 500 westlets per florin, and who is going to carry 499 westlets in their purse?). But the old coins are still around, and can still be used (for another three or four months, before they are phased out and only exchange shops will take them)

So - I would still say that the resolution is a good thing and should not be repealed, even if it does cause some issues for nations.

Cobdenia still uses (Cobdenian) pounds, shillings and pence.

Cobdenia still uses (Cobdenian) pounds, shillings and pence.
i thought it only affected measurment, not currency

It does.

I would also like to say that the use of the metric system makes more sense mathematically than any other system of measurement I have encountered/read about/heard of/considered inventing. For one thing, it just makes common sense to have a measuring system based on exponents of ten considering the fact that base ten mathematics comes much more easily than any other base to a species whose hands have ten (count 'em, ten!) digits. Use of the metric system also simplifies matters for those dealing with large amounts of data as part of their daily job.

To address the above issue, I would say that if one is used to a system, then it will automatically come easy. But I digress... the debate, really, isn't about whether or not one system is better or worse than another, it's about whether the UN should be allowed to legislate on this issue. I would argue that if the UN wants to mandate metric for international trade, that's one thing, but to decide what's taught as a practical matter within the borders of the country. That's something else entirely.

Rt. Hon. Sir George Montaup, J.D., Q.C., K.P.O.
Associate Justice, Osbalstium High Court
High Court Building
Osbalstiumensis, Osbalstium

i thought it only affected measurment, not currency

I know, that's why Cobdenia still uses a sensible currency system and our kids are still really good at maths!

[snip] I would argue that if the UN wants to mandate metric for international trade, that's one thing, but to decide what's taught as a practical matter within the borders of the country. That's something else entirely.



But it already has. To undo that now would cause far more disruption than any possible gain.