It makes perfect sense... 100 is fucking hot, 0 is fucking cold. 50 is comfortable in a sweatshirt, 60 in a long sleeved shirt, 70 in a t-shirt, and 80 in a swim suit. Basically the Fahrenheit system is based on normalized temperatures that exist on earth, not some physical property of a common chemical.

Yeah, soils typically have a specific gravity of like 2.5... So that's your scale factor. But you see why civil engineers typically use english units. They units are based on tangible quantities, not some scientific ease of math basis. When we need easy math, we use kilopounds and decimal feet. The fact that metric units are based on a scientific standard is irrelevant. As long as there is a standard and it's consistently used, there isn't a problem. As far as people complaining about units like 12, 8, and 4 instead of 10 is ridiculous. Plenty of times you end up working with fractions instead of decimals, and that's why english systems use the even units so they can be split into fractions. Math might be easier for decimal, but most of the people doing construction work AREN'T GOOD AT MATH, but they understand half, third, quarter, etc. That's why construction typically uses english units.

I had a 2010 Pontiac G6 with only MPH ticks on the speedometer. It was a pain in the ass in Canada...

That's your problem... You are assuming power users. Do you know how many people I know who still go to the edit menu to select COPY and PASTE rather than using keyboard shortcuts or even right clicking?

No, speed studies show that most people (85th percentile) drive 70-75 mph on interstates. No studies show that more than 1/2% of people drive 120. I personally think the government should get out of it and private firms like Good Housekeeping or Underwriters Laboratories could create their own fuel efficiency test and market those numbers. Then companies could compete to have the most accurate number for what most people will experience.

+1 Damn straight... I like your style Anonymous Coward!

I'm sorry, can you please give an example where the government is more cost effective than the private sector? I sure can't think of one. If the government is so much more cost effective than the private sector then their profit margins must be ridiculously high! Oh wait, they're in debt up to our eyeballs...

Private education is cheaper and more effective than public education.
Private charity is more effective with less funds than public handouts.
UPS and FedEx are cheaper and faster (for comparable services) than the USPS.
Need I go on?

I am a male and over 25. I happen to a be a civil engineer who has studied traffic design and optimal flow patterns. I also happen to have taken several defensive driving courses offered by very different organizations. I also have taken several advanced driving courses through the National Auto Sport Association. In addition to all of that, I spend more than 10 hours per week driving controlled access highways.

As far as my driving habits, I drive less than 10mph over the speed limit, and leave a generous amount of following distance. I don't even own an automatic transmission vehicle and I do all my own maintenance. I know cars, how they work, how they behave. I know roads, how they are designed, and how to optimize their use. I know people, their behaviors, and their attitudes.

Yes, lane discipline requires more lane switching. If you properly adjust your mirrors and you have the foresight to buy a car with good visibility, you have no blind spots. If you follow the good practice of checking your mirrors often you are aware of the vehicles around you and always aware of when you can make a safe lane change without taking your eyes off the road (doing a head turn). Drivers on the autobahn manage to safely have high speeds and large speed differentials without statistically higher rates of accidents because they are well trained drivers and keep to the right except to pass.

In my knowledge and experience, far too many people think they are justified in sitting in the middle lane because they are going the speed limit or better when there is no justifiable reason to be there. All it does is force more lane changes or right passes from people following the rules and form the worst case scenario for safety which is essentially a rapid in the middle of the road. Merging traffic is only an excuse in old urban highways where there are not adequate acceleration lanes. In the rest of cases, those defensive driving instructors should be teaching people the accelerator pedal is the only pedal you need to merge into traffic. You need to be going the speed of traffic on the highway or greater before you attempt to merge. People in the right lane have the right of way and have no obligation to move over or give you space, it is simply courtesy to do so.

Canada, Denmark, and New Zealand are higher than the US on the Heritage economic freedom index. They openly admit to some socialism and they are freer than we Americans are. Finland and the Netherlands are also pretty high up there.

Defensive driving instructors are morons... They teach you to minimize your own risk and hassle at the expense of everyone else. There is a reason that the shoulder is car width on the right so you can dodge either way in the rightmost lane. And if they properly taught people how to merge, there would be no problem with being in the right lane. You don't have to move over if you look far enough ahead and plan. Heaven forbid you have to turn off your cruise control and pay attention...

Uniform Vehicle Code in the US says: "a car driving below the "normal speed of traffic" should be driven in the right-hand lane." though laws vary by state. See attached link for more details on a state by state basis.

http://jalopnik.com/5501615/left+lane-passing-laws-a-state+by+state-map

Yes that works fine until I am cruising in the right lane (where I am supposed to be) when I come up to you schlopping along in the middle lane. Do I go two lanes over to pass you or do I just stay in my lane? Also, what a car that is overtaking you wants to be overtaken again? Maybe you should learn how to merge properly...

Uniform Vehicle Code in the US says: "a car driving below the "normal speed of traffic" should be driven in the right-hand lane." though laws vary by state. See attached link for more details on a state by state basis.

http://jalopnik.com/5501615/left+lane-passing-laws-a-state+by+state-map

Yeah, about that. Your margin of error is pretty tiny. I would like to see your dataset before you make claims like that. If you knew anything about how gasoline is transported, sold, and marketed, you'd know that in a certain region it is highly likely that all of the stations you listed got the exact same gas out of the exact same pipe. The only difference is a tiny amount of cleaning additive that doesn't change the energy content of the fuel.

Exactly, it's stupid to make peak fuel efficiency on the highway 55-60 when auto makers KNOW people drive 70-75. It's essentially the government mandating we intentionally waste fuel to have a test that isn't realistic for what people actually drive.

Incorrect. The correct driving lane is the rightmost lane you can occupy. If you are going 100mph you should still be in the right lane if you aren't passing. Idiots like you cruising along in the middle lane are why I end up passing you on the right. If you are in the correct lane you will NEVER be passed on the right.