Not to mention that a Danish "billion" is not the same as a US "billion".
A Danish, Norwegian, Swedish ("biljon" ) billion is 10^12, a US billion is 10^9.
It's utterly confusing sometimes, and this is one of the fewer cases where US metric makes much more sense.
Ah, I like to think in steps of factors 10^3. Thousand, Million, Billion, Trillion. Very rarely do you get to numbers above this (non-science related), and when you do, scientific notation is more relatable.
I think I have almost never in my life (in Norway), seen "Billiard", "Trillion" or "Trilliard" used anywhere.
You're right. I should also have mentioned that it was more intuitive (for me), that {mono-, di-, tri-} was the 1000 factor prefix, as opposed to {mono-|{-ion,-ard}, di-|{-ion,-ard}, tri-|{-ion,-ard}}.
I'm not arguing expressibility. It's just different names. I just found the system my country uses (long scale) to be less intuitive than the one used by the US (short scale).
Just take a look at the comparison [1], and make up your own mind on what is intuitive, and what not. I'm not saying you or anyone is "wrong". I find it hard to see good reason for the long scale, but I'll entertain arguments.
A Danish, Norwegian, Swedish ("biljon" ) billion is 10^12, a US billion is 10^9. It's utterly confusing sometimes, and this is one of the fewer cases where US metric makes much more sense.
US: million, billion, trillion. 10^6, 10^9, 10^12
Skandinavia: million, milliard, billion, billiard, trillion, trilliard 10^6, 10^9, 10^12, etc
PS: I don't know about the rest of the world.