Sometimes I like to think about the logistical challenges with a switch to metric. The one that always gives me pause is highway signs. Thinking about the monumental task of replacing every speed sign, distance sign, and mile marker across the country in any timely period makes my head hurt.
It could certainly be done, and is probably easier than I think with all the state DoTs working independently on it especially over time. We have a lot of road with a lot of signs.
I honestly hate that argument. “it would cost so much to change all those signs” is just negative talk for “it would employee a shit ton of people, create a lot of jobs, and be a major infrastructure project that could help our economy.”.
Honestly, the economic benefit of major infrastructure works is rarely talked about as much as it should be. Mainly, I think, because the people it benefits are the ones actually doing the work. And that’s scary to a certain segment of society that would like very much that not to be the case.
I don’t think it’s a valid argument against metric, just a thought experiment to consider about the time needed to implement. Converting would be a slow process, but I agree it could be an economic boost as swapping things is a largely a manual process
Meant to mention in my first comment, I haven’t met many other people who like to randomly imagine the ways major structural changes would take place. Lol.
I like to pick a huge project. Like, say, single payer healthcare, or the nationalization of an industry, and then imagine the individual steps that would need to be taken to get there. Doesn’t necessarily have to be a project I’d support, I just have fun imagining the ways it would need to happen.
I think the bigger one is the construction industry.
2"x4" studs. 4’x8’ plywood. 16" O.C.
Changing to 44x95, 1219x2438, 406 O.C doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. We could switch over to the metric equivalents (like 1250x1250 or 600 O.C.), but that would mean switching out machinery and would break a lot of standards.
Sometimes I like to think about the logistical challenges with a switch to metric. The one that always gives me pause is highway signs. Thinking about the monumental task of replacing every speed sign, distance sign, and mile marker across the country in any timely period makes my head hurt.
It could certainly be done, and is probably easier than I think with all the state DoTs working independently on it especially over time. We have a lot of road with a lot of signs.
I honestly hate that argument. “it would cost so much to change all those signs” is just negative talk for “it would employee a shit ton of people, create a lot of jobs, and be a major infrastructure project that could help our economy.”. Honestly, the economic benefit of major infrastructure works is rarely talked about as much as it should be. Mainly, I think, because the people it benefits are the ones actually doing the work. And that’s scary to a certain segment of society that would like very much that not to be the case.
I don’t think it’s a valid argument against metric, just a thought experiment to consider about the time needed to implement. Converting would be a slow process, but I agree it could be an economic boost as swapping things is a largely a manual process
Meant to mention in my first comment, I haven’t met many other people who like to randomly imagine the ways major structural changes would take place. Lol.
I like to pick a huge project. Like, say, single payer healthcare, or the nationalization of an industry, and then imagine the individual steps that would need to be taken to get there. Doesn’t necessarily have to be a project I’d support, I just have fun imagining the ways it would need to happen.
I think the bigger one is the construction industry.
2"x4" studs. 4’x8’ plywood. 16" O.C.
Changing to 44x95, 1219x2438, 406 O.C doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. We could switch over to the metric equivalents (like 1250x1250 or 600 O.C.), but that would mean switching out machinery and would break a lot of standards.