Why doesn't the U.S. use the metric system like the rest of the world, but instead they use Imperial.?
141959
There are several elements:\n- For historical reasons, the USA developed its own system of measurement. This is in fact NOT the imperial system of measurement, although it is based on the imperial system. It is correctly known is te USA system of measurement. The following reference discusses this in more detail.\n- The reasons for changing to metric are well known. However, there are huge costs to doing so. The population has to be reeducated which takes years and during this transistion period there are a lot of difficulties. Factories have to be retooled, machines replaced, and so on. The USA watched Canada switch over and many people felt the costs outweighed the benefits. I speak as a Canadian and as pro-metric, but I recognise the disruption to industry and to the life of older people who struggled with the change.\n- The USA also benefits from a huge internal market. Whereas most countries are largely dependent on foreign trade, the size of the USA market means that they are much less dependent on foreign trade so there is less pressure on them to change to metric to match up with their trading partners. This is less true of smaller countries.\n- There is also people's general resistance to change. The American population as a whole neither wants to nor sees a need to change to metric.\n- The political element is also important. Any senior politician who was strongly pro-metric (and looked like he could force the metric system through) would find this a major liability for his electoral chances.\n- There are also emotional connections to historical items\n\nThe list goes on. It is a complex issue and unlikely to be resolved soon. However, my personal belief is that one day the USA will follow the rest of the world and go metric.
619422
Beacause many people perceive the metric system to be complicated. In fact it is much easier than the US system; it is the conversion between systems that is complicated.\nThe answer is to throw away your inch or inch/metric tapes and get a metric only tape. Ditto for scales, thermometers etc. And just use metric units. \n\nWhen you go to the shops, demand to be served in litres, kg etc. If they moan, tell them that congress legalised metric units in 1875. Only commercial pressure will win in the end.
27647
I like the current system.\n\nFurther more the reason is that it makes it harder for other countries to copy or stuff like nuclear reactors.\n\n\nEngland by the way still uses miles as a measure of distance.
105116
The English system of measurement grew out of the creative way that people measured for themselves.  Familiar objects and parts of the body were used as measuring devices.  For example, people measured shorter distances on the ground with their feet.\n\nWeight:\n\n16 ounces (oz) = 1 pound (lb)\n2000 lb = 1 ton\n\n \nCapacity:\n\n3 teaspoons (tsp) = 1 tablespoon (tbsp)\n 16 tbsp = 1 cup (c)\n8 ounces (oz) = 1 c\n2 c = 1 pint (pt)\n2 pt = 1 quart (qt)\n4 qt = 1 gallon (gal\n\n\nMetric system of weights and measures planned in France and adopted there in 1799; it has since been adopted by most of the technologically developed countries of the world. It is based on a unit of length, called the meter (m), and a unit of mass, called the kilogram (kg). It is easier to convert from one unit to another since it is in power of 10.\n\nEx.  10 cm = 1 dm, 10 dm = 1 m,  100 cm= 1 m\n\nMetric to English\nLength:\n\n1 mm = 0.04 in\n1 cm = 0.39 in\n 1 m = 39.37 in = 3.28 ft\n1 m = 1.09 yd\n1 km = 0.62 mi\n\nWeight:\n\n1 g = 0.035 oz\n1 l = 1.057 qt\n\n\nCapacity:\n\n1 ml = .2 tsp\n1 l = 1.057 qt\n\n\nEnglish to Metric \nLength:\n\n1 in = 2.54 cm\n1 ft = 30.48 cm = 0.305 m\n 1 yd = 0.914 m\n1 mi = 1.609 km\n\n\nWeight:\n\n1 oz = 28.350 g\n1 lb = 0.453 kg\n\n\nCapacity:\n\n1 tsp = 5 ml\n1 c = 236 ml\n1 qt = 0.946 l\n1 gal = 3.785 l\n\n\nLength:\n\n12 inches (in) = 1 foot (ft)\n3 feet  = 1 yard (yd)\n 5280 feet = 1 mile (mi)
351671
The trade unions (plumbers, pipefitters, electricians) in the US were against switching over to metric.  It would have been too costly for them.
453614
It's a cultural and an economic thing.\n\nHistorically Canada and the US acquired our measurement systems from England, which was highly influenced by the Germanic peoples, hence the attraction to "Fahrenheit".\n\nEngland, however was under economic pressure to trade with the other European countries (nearness) where the metric system and Celcius (both French origin) has been used. The English would not have accepted anything French if they could have avoided it, but money talks, and there was trade to be increased if England used the European systems more. Canada, being more closely tied to England than is the US, followed England's direction and used the metric more. That Canada has a significant French population has made a difference also I am sure.\n\nThe U. S., however, developed industrialy more rapidly than Canada, and did not follow the direction of England. We did not feel the economic pressures that England felt because we had more natural resources and were more self sufficient in our industrial production. Unlike Canada, the US was free of any ties to England, and with its fleet of merchant vessels found outlets for her manufactured products in more distant countries; and we cared less than England about the European markets. So we have stuck with the Fahrenheit thermometer, and the inch, foot, yard, mile, pound, ton system in practice, although we say we are changing over to the SI system.\n\nScience in the US uses the SI system, while much of the engineering application remains in the foot and pound system. We have tried and are still trying to change fully to the SI system, as witnessed by the nuts and bolts on our cars which are half in SI units, and half in the English, but industry is reluctant to change when it costs unrecoverable money to do so.
6536
No one person invented the Metric System, but it dates to 18th century France.  You're right, we do already have a system, called Standard that has pounds, ounces and so on.  The reason that Metric is prefered (and indeed used by almost all developed nations except the United States) is simple:  How many ounces are in a gallon? How many square feet are in an acre?  How many inches are in a yard?  These questions yeild the following answers; .0078, 2.29 x 10^-5 and 36, not easy numbers to work with.  With Metric, the major marking points are 10, 100, 1000, and so on.  The modern metric system also uses extremely sophisticated ways of getting precise measurements based on natural objects (the size of the earth, the weight of water and so on).
267272
The "metric" systems used long ago, or measurement systems used long ago?\n\nThe metric system was developed in France at the end of the 18th century (late 1700s).  They defined their units of measurement originally by physical objects.  Today, we are a bit more advanced with how we define the metric units, only one of them (the kg) is still defined as an actual object's.\n\nBut their were obviously lots more systems of measurement before the metric system.  I dont know too many of the more obscure systems, but their were units of distance such as the "hand" and the "cubit" (you'll see that one used the bible a few times), as well as "stones" for mass.
628619
The majority of facilities in the US are and have been\nyard pools.  US started with a non-metric system and has not been able to convert all pools to metric.  Our major competitions other than High school and College are held metric.  Smaller or shorter pools are less expensive to construct so we can have more of them.  Thus more swimmers\ncan have the advantage of a facility. USA-S has about 300,000 competitive swimmers that use METRIC pools.  There are millions that swim recreationally in yard pools.
370894
England for a start. We use feet, inches, pounds, miles and stone, we're rather resistant to the metric system. America uses some of it I believe with things liek miles and lbs but i think slowly they're turning to metric more and more. The rest of Europe is very strictly metric, leading the way is France
145722
While it originated in France, the metric system is based on easily observable phenomena in nature (the meter is a certain number of wavelengths of light, the kilogram is the weight of a certain amount of pure water, etc.) so there is no longer any need to keep a "standard meter bar of platinum" or a "standard kilogram at sea level" anywhere.
651423
Advantages:\n\n1) SI i.e. (The Metric System) is base on multiples of ten which makes scientific calculations easier.\n\n2) Worldwide use of SI allows for greater integration of technologies and skills internationally.\n\nDisadvantage:\n\n1) Many people are reluctant to convert over from Imperial.\n\n\n--------------------------------------\nYou did mean SI UNITS right?\n--------------------------------------
636009
Well, as a master electrician once said to me:\n"They will bury me before I will use metric."\nWe would have to change all of our nominal sizes of building materials. Plywood 4'*8', conduit length 10', etc.\n\nAll of our land surveys, which are legal documents would be out of date as well, and that would be a massive undertaking.\n\nI agree that metric is better, but change is difficult for people.\n\nThe price of a fixed volume of gas does not change whether you use metric or standard.\n\nOne thing I will say about standard measurements is that they factor well.\n\ne.g., 12" has factors 2,3,4,6 which is nice.\nThe 24 hour 60 minute clock is determined this way for a reason.\n\na 120" stick of conduit factors by 2,3,4,5,6,8,10,15,20,24,30,40,60\nTricky, huh?\n\nFahrenheit has a greater resolution or granularity in it's degrees (of integer sig. figs).\n\nIncidentally, The 2005 National Electric Code has changed to metric(primary) standard(sub).
691415
The SI (metric) unit used to measure mass is the gram.\n\nThe Imperial (English) unit used to measure mass is pounds and ounces.
759406
There's the English system, using feet, pounds and seconds.\n\nThere are the two metric systems, differing only in where you put the decimal point.  The cgs system is centimeter-gram-second.  The mks system is meter-kilogram-second.  These are also called SI (System Internationale).
114062
I dont know, people are just slow to change I guess.  Also, there isnt much reason for the "average" person to change, they can get through life quite easily not know a single metric unit.\n\nThe United States has through redinfined its standard measurement system in terms of metric equililents and is suppose to use metric measurement on official stuff.\nCongressed passed the Metric Conversion in 1975 to promote the use of the metric system in the US.\n\nI love the SI system, it is great.  I am get a little agrivated when I have to explain how many pounds are in a kilogram to people, and I think in Liters.\nHowever, I still like to use miles per hour for speed.
526487
Hey dummy - the US gallon is actually the older of the two measurements. Great Britain changed what was then called the "Liquid Gallon" (now known as the "US Gallon") into what is now the "Imperial Gallon" or the "Ale Gallon" in order to have an easily calculable relationship with the pound (weight, not money). Read all about it here before you make a fool of yourself again.\n http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gallon\nThe United States didn't change the gallon, Great Britain changed it!!!