Re: ARS License Numbers

[Slow Code]

wrote in
oups.com:

> These are the numbers of current, unexpired
> amateur radio licenses held by individuals
> on the stated dates, and the percentage of
> the total number of active licenses that
> class contains:
>
> As of May 14, 2000:
>
> Novice - 49,329 (7.3%)
> Technician - 205,394 (30.4%)
> Technician Plus - 128,860 (19.1%)
> General - 112,677 (16.7%)
> Advanced - 99,782 (14.8%)
> Extra - 78,750 (11.7%)
>
> Total Tech/TechPlus - 334,254 (49.5%)
>
> Total General/Advanced/Extra - 291,209 (43.2%)
>
> Total all classes - 674,792
>
>
> As of September 1, 2006:
>
> Novice - 24,494 (3.7%) [decrease of 24,835]
> Technician - 284,694 (43.3%) [increase of 79,300]
> Technician Plus - 36,183 (5.5%) [decrease of 92,677]
> General - 132,213 (20.1%) [increase of 19,536]
> Advanced - 71,045 (10.8%) [decrease of 28,737]
> Extra - 108,307 (16.5%) [increase of 29,557]
>
> (percentages may not add up to exactly 100.0% due to rounding)
>
> Total Tech/TechPlus - 320,877 (48.8%) [decrease of 13,377]
>
> Total General/Advanced/Extra - 311,565 (47.4%) [increase of 20,356]
>
> Total all classes - 656,936 (decrease of 17,856)
>
> Note that these totals do not include licenses
> that have expired but are in the grace period.
>
> They also do not include club, military, RACES
> or other station-only licenses.
>
> Note also that effective April 15, 2000, new
> Novice, Technician Plus and Advanced licenses
> are no longer issued.
>
> Since April 15, 2000, FCC has renewed all existing
> Technician Plus licenses as Technician. It is therefore
> informative to consider the totals of the two classes,
> since the Technician class includes a significant
> number of Technician Plus licenses renewed as
> Technician.
>
> 73 de Jim, N2EY


Thanks Jim.

Maybe now everyone will see that dumbing things down was bad for ham
radio.

73

SC

[an old friend]

Slow Code wrote:
> wrote in
>> Thanks Jim.
>
> Maybe now everyone will see that dumbing things down was bad for ham
> radio.
wht dumbing down has occured since Ham radio was dumbed down with
higher code test speeds?
>
> 73
>
> SC

[an old friend]

wrote:
>
trolling right along

[Slow Code]

"an old friend" > wrote in
oups.com:

>
> Slow Code wrote:
>> wrote in
>>> Thanks Jim.
>>
>> Maybe now everyone will see that dumbing things down was bad for ham
>> radio.
> wht dumbing down has occured since Ham radio was dumbed down with
> higher code test speeds?


You're living proof CW was a good filter for lazy lids. It didn't keep all
the lids out, but it did keep stupid ones out until they come up with the
no code tech license.

Sc

[an old friend]

Slow Code wrote:
> "an old friend" > wrote in
> oups.com:

> > wht dumbing down has occured since Ham radio was dumbed down with
> > higher code test speeds?
>
>
> You're living proof CW was a good filter for lazy lids.
nope
> It didn't keep all
> the lids out, but it did keep stupid ones out until they come up with the
> no code tech license.
nope witness wisemn and yourself

slow code:kook on parade
>
> Sc

[an old friend]

wrote:
>
Woger:kook on parade

[an old friend]

wrote:
> wrote:
> > On 5 Sep 2006 06:11:03 -0700, wrote:
> >


> > Woger you are an FCC certified bad operator
>
> He is? Where?
FCC NAl certify your bad operating
>You are a State of Michigan (and other states) registered
> child molester.

http://www.mipsor.state.mi.us/mipsor/default.htm
funny how the state disagress

[an Old friend]

wrote:
> > > >You are a State of Michigan (and other states) registered
> > > child molester.
> >
> > http
>
> Funny how you make a fake website.

woger: lying kook on parade
http://www.mipsor.state.mi.us/*mipsor/default.htm
running from the truth as alaways

[an Old friend]

wrote:
> > > >You are a State of Michigan (and other states) registered
> > > child molester.
> >
> > http
>
> Funny how you make a fake website.

woger: lying kook on parade
http://www.mipsor.state.mi.us/*mipsor/default.htm
running from the truth as alaways