I do hope some-one buries a copy of this thread in a time capsule somewhere. It should be good for some raucous laughter in about 50 year's time. Mind you, the designers/builders of the Tower of Babel have a lot to answer for in establishing so many different systems of units around the globe.
There are some beautifully fallaceous arguments for maintaining a status quo to be found in this one thread.
eg "the amount of information that has to be changed is humungous...that nobody is willing to accept the cost". But some countries have accepted the cost.
Having made the conversion, it didn't seem any big deal in Australia (where, surprisingly we do have road signs and maps etc). Granted, pipe fittings and the like largely remain non-metric, but they are not generally nicely 'imperial' anyway (other than threads/inch, how many of the thread dimensions are good looking numbers in either inches or mm?) Similarly wire gauges, which have always been a total mystery to me anyway.
Personally I find dynamic calculations very much simpler in the SI system. All I need to bear in mind is the definition of a Newton force (the force which accelerates a mass of 1 kg by 1 m/sec^2), and all is clear. No more having to remember the nicety of pounds, poundals, slugs, the gravitational constant or whatever.
I, like many others of my age, went through a period of wondering what on earth my design calculations in SI units really meant, and whether the results were reasonable. (When I first read 'Newton' in technical papers, I was inclined to believe that it referred to a New ton - yet another sort of ton, to go with the long, short and metric tons !). But that passed quite quickly, and I would hate to have to return to imperial units again.
And for those who hanker for 'human derived units' - what would be more 'human' than to name the SI force unit after the 'inventor' of gravity, and make it equal to the weight of a British Standard Apple? (About 10 to the kilogram, 4.5 to the pound)