  Lawvere showed that generalised metric spaces are categories enriched over
$[0, \infty]$, the quantale of the positive extended reals. The statement of
enrichment is a quantitative analogue of being a preorder. Towards seeking a
logic for quantitative metric reasoning, we investigate three
$[0,\infty]$-valued propositional logics over the Lawvere quantale. The basic
logical connectives shared by all three logics are those that can be
interpreted in any quantale, viz finite conjunctions and disjunctions, tensor
(addition for the Lawvere quantale) and linear implication (here a truncated
subtraction); to these we add, in turn, the constant $1$ to express integer
values, and scalar multiplication by a non-negative real to express general
affine combinations. Quantitative equational logic can be interpreted in the
third logic if we allow inference systems instead of axiomatic systems. For
each of these logics we develop a natural deduction system which we prove to be
decidably complete w.r.t. the quantale-valued semantics. The heart of the
completeness proof makes use of the Motzkin transposition theorem. Consistency
is also decidable; the proof makes use of Fourier-Motzkin elimination of linear
inequalities. Strong completeness does not hold in general, even (as is known)
for theories over finitely-many propositional variables; indeed even an
approximate form of strong completeness in the sense of Pavelka or Ben Yaacov
-- provability up to arbitrary precision -- does not hold. However, we can show
it for theories axiomatized by a (not necessarily finite) set of judgements in
normal form over a finite set of propositional variables when we restrict to
models that do not map variables to $\infty$; the proof uses Hurwicz's general
form of the Farkas' Lemma.
