Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote
Michael Coslo wrote:
Back in the '50s and '60s, and maybe even into the '70s, almost all
new
hams were teenagers or young adults. Young people still make up a
good
percentage of new hams, but since about the mid-late 1970s we've
seen
an increasing percentage of older people as newcomers. Indeed, back
in
the early 1980s - *before* the Tech lost its code test - there was
(and
still is) a surge of retired and almost-retired folks in these
parts
getting ham licenses. Lots of new faces and lots of great hams, but
unfortunately most of them won't be hams long enough to join OOTC.
The Demographic shift in Amateur Radio is similar to many other
hobbies/avocations. I think once the dust settles, the typical new
ham
will be in his or her 40's, and wanting to have a new pursuit after
becoming financially stable and perhaps having a bit more spare time
in
his hands.
The exact same thing has already happened in my other hobby, Amateur
Astronomy.
Maybe.
But a lot of folks I know who are in their '40s don't fit your
description, struggling with jobs, kids, etc.
But it is indisputable that the reductions in requirements have NOT
had any sort of significant positive impact on the Ham community.
Not long-term, anyway.
Despite the hand wringing, there is a place for achieving
something
that means something. A test that is a challenge? So what? I
personally think that the ARS is only strengthened by attracting
people that
enjoy a bit of a challenge.
That's a key point.
I think it has been adequately proven that many if not most of the
people that think that Element one needs to go away are also in
favor
of reduced overall licensing requirements. Certainly the leading
organization for removal of the Morse test is.
Yep. And if Element 1 is removed, and we still don't get growth,
guess
what's next? NCVEC has already shown their hand.
Let us not forget NCI.
Basically that position consists of accepting almost any compromise
that will
get rid of the code test.
Note that almost 5 years after the 200 restructuring we still
retain more than 50% of Novices and 75% of Advanceds.
This indicates to me a significant number of inactive hams. Sure,
there
are some who are satisfied with their license privs, but I suspect
a
lot more are SK or have dropped out.
Pretty much
This has always been the case since I've been a ham. It's gotten worse
since
the 10 year license term.
The number of Techs continues to grow in part because all Tech
Pluses
have been renewed as Techs since April 2000. But the total number
of
Techs and Tech Pluses is s few percent lower than it was in 2000.
Agreed! But of course people have to know what ham radio *is* to
do that!
Someone suggested some short commercial spots on time.
"on time"?
Typo! "one" time...
I wonder if that
has ever been done. Nothing too elaborate, just getting the
name out there.
Good idea, but expensive.
Seems like there are Hams that are professionals in the field that
might be willing to help!......
Still have to buy the time.
I would bet that a well thought out program could get some public
service spots on local access TV.
I guess I'm not inspiring you yet? 8^)
Local access TV may bring in a few folks, but not like network TV.
Maybe PBS could do a special? Imagine if Ken Burns did a documentary on
amateur radio...
Yet the NCVEC folks say the solution is to create a class of ham
that
can't use rigs with more than 30 volts on the electronics...
Goofy, goofy, goofy!
Tell it to NCVEC. They think they know better than you.
From what I gather, their underlying concern was actually that
they
think their VE's were having to work too hard.
Perhaps. Also, the "Amateur Radio in the 21st Century" paper
equated
passing the code test with winning the Tour de France or painting
the
Mona Lisa,
Wow! now I feel really great about passing!!! ;^)
Didja read that paper, and my rebuttal?
and described the stress of dealing with grown people crying
because they'd flunked the code test....boo-hoo....
Funny you should mention that. the first time I took element 1... and
flunked... I was not pleased, but Figured I'd do it again, the person
who was the most upset was the VE. I felt worse for him than myself.
Lessee...I was 14 and flunked 13 wpm the first go because the examiner
couldn't read my longhand. What the sadistic IHM nuns called "Palmer
Method",
for some reason.
So I went home and taught myself to block print and copy Morse in big
square capital letters (a skill not taught in the parochial schools of
the day) and came back some weeks later, when I passed easily.
I don't think tears would have had any effect on ol' Joe Squelch back
then...
Shrub says hydrogen is the answer. Oh the humanity.
Hydrogen's energy density issues make for some problems. That
Excursion
will have to tack on another 10 miles per hour on trips to make up
for
all the fuel stops needed.
Naw, just liquefy the stuff.
Yoiks! Liquid H? Even if, the energy density is still quite a bit
less
than gasoline. something like 25 percent.
Storage concerns are a big problem with the stuff. In a similar
fashion
We have Natural gas buses in our area. Their tanks are on the bus
roof,
and run the length of the bus. You just can't get as much energy out
of
the stuff.
Didja know the USA is now *importing* LNG from the Middle East and
other places?
The big problems a
- Handling a fuel that is a gas at STP is more complex than one
that is
a liquid.
- Danger of fire and leaking pressure tanks
- Where's all the hydrogen supposed to come from?
Yup. While seawater might seem like the obvious way out, hydrolysis
of
seawater produces interesting byproducts.
Yep. Plus - where do you get the electricity to hydrolyze the seawater?
Now tell the people in the western US that you want to take a huge
amount of their fresh water!! 8^) It is in short enough supply as it
is.
Might as well develop electric cars...
You mean like dragging the gay marriage issue into the Social
Security problem? 8^)
Yep. The interesting thing is that allowing gay civil unions would
*increase* tax revenue.
And speaking of marriage: One thing I find interesting is that the
divorce rates in the "red" states are consistently and clearly
higher
than the rates in "blue" states. Seems those folks who rant and
rave
about "family values" and "covenants" can't seem to stay hitched
very
long.
All you have to do is meet some of the "reds", and you'll
immediately
understand why they have such a high divorce rate......
Ya gotta be more specific than that!
hehe, when I think of the modern conservative, I keep getting this
vision od Old man Newt.
You mean the "family values" guy who had divorce papers served on his
first wife (who had supported him through law school and the early
struggles of his political career) while she was *in the hospital
undergoing cancer treatment*?
Here's the kind of thinking being put forth:
One plan being suggested in DC is for the USA to create a special
savings account for each baby born in the USA, starting on a
certain
date. The Feds would put $2000 into each account each year until
the
kid reaches 18. Total investment $36,000. Assuming about 6% annual
interest, each account would be worth over a million dollars when
the
"baby" reached 65.
Nice retirement package, huh? Except it won't work for several
reasons
completely obvious to anyone with common sense.
Who pays that 6 percent interest?
That's the first problem.
The last time I checked, the rate
wasn't anywhere near that.
Bingo!
Taxes on that money? Capital gains?
The money would be tax exempt until the person began to draw upon
it.
Inflation?
That's a BIG one!
~30 years ago, when I was entering the job market out of college,
entry-level engineers with degrees were making about what *minimum
wage* is now. Go back 50 years, and a $5000/yr income put the
average
person on Easy Street, able to support a middle-class family in a
way
that $50,000/yr won't do today.
Even if inflation stays low over the next 65 years, $1 million
won't be
enough to retire on. What really matters, of course, is what I call
"differential interest" - the difference between inflation and the
apparent interest rate. If you get interest of 6% and inflation of
2%,
your money is really only growing at a rate of 4%.
Your going to have to have some sort of way that the guvmint
pays interest on the account when the prime is low, or you will be
creating a powerful incentive for citizens to want a high interest
rate
which is counterproductive to the economy......The list goes on and
on.
Yep.
Also interesting how everyone in the US will retire a millionaire!
Sounds good until the reality cuts in. There are lots of
millionaires
today - on paper anyway.
Ain't gonna work!
Yet that isn't some wild-eyed idea - it's something our alleged
leadership has suggested!
Hey yeah! The stock Market always goes up over the long term, right?
Yep. Whether it keeps up with inflation is another issue.
While that may be true, people keep applying it to irrelevant issues.
This case is just one of using interest in a way that sounds good if
you
don't look too deep.
By the way, did you know the producer of the "Swiftboat Veterns" is
now
producing smear videos and literature against the AARP? The same
people
they eagerly worked with a year or two earlier.
The Swift Boat dude has been playing that game for decades. Never mind
that lots of other vets, who served *with* Mr. Kerry, tell a completely
different story.
no shame, at long last, no shame.
Didn't AARP lose membership for supporting Shrub's prescription plan?
Consider these other problems:
If there are, say, 4 million births per year, the govt. will need
to
put $8 billion into the accounts the first year, $16 billion the
second
year, $24 billion the third year, etc. This won't stabilize until
the
18th year, when it reaches $144 billion per year being put aside in
these accounts. Most of that money would have to come from *new*
revenue sources, because the existing Social Security system would
have
to continue to exist for a while. And that's based on *no* increase
in
baby production!
Where's all that money supposed to come from?
Tax cuts.
HAW!
Then there's the question of shenanigans. Some people will try to
beat
the system in one way or another. More likely are govt.
shenaningans -
it will be hard for the pols to keep their paws off all that money
in
the accounts, just as they can't leave Social Security alone.
Remember
that the *real* problem with Social Security is that the current
administration doesn't want to pay back what was borrowed! What's
to
keep them from "borrowing" from the new system?
Nada.
Yep.
73 de Jim, N2EY