| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes: What money Larry? The ARS is non-commercial. Carl: Yup. That's correct. The ARS is non-commercial, and therefore is an unproductive drain on the FCC's administrative resources. The FCC and Congress see the ARS as a valuable national resource. Carl: That doesn't mean that they don't see the advantage to them in reducing ARS licensing standards, as has already been proven. NCI doesn't even have mandatory dues and has lived on voluntary donations its whole life. That's just swell, Carl, but I don't recall this being about NCI and it's funding sources. I was just trying to address what appeared to be a "someone's going to make money off of this" scenario ... your text came across that way. Change the word "make" to "save," and you've finally got it right. What money are you talking about? (If you say "the manufacturers" that's baloney. I haven't seen a SINGLE comment filed on the current round of petitions by any manufacturer ...) Carl - wk3c The "money" I'm talking about is that represented by all the OTHER commercial radio services administered by the FCC. Oh ... why didn't you say that? Didn't have to. The ARS doesn't "make" money, Carl -- except for the equipment manufacturers, but as you said, they aren't fighting any of the petitions to eliminate code testing, since they figure it's going to result in increased future sales. In any event, they're just pocket change compared to the commercial broadcasting and communications services. This is where the FCC's true mission exists, The FCC has a Congressional mandate to regulate all of the radio spectrum "in the public interest, convenience, and necessity" - that includes the ARS. Which doesn't say anything about how far they can reduce licensing standards. and to a far greater extent than in what is now primarily a hobbyist service (amateur radio). YOU view it as primarily a hobby ... and it is a hobby, but the FCC and Congress look at it as a public service *provided for free to society* by folks who do it as a hobby. They also value the educational opportunities it presents in a society that increasingly requires people who are trained in radio/electronics. Well, considering the fact that licensing requirements are already just short of meaningless, and that most hams these days haven't a clue about what's going on inside their off-the-shelf gear, it's kinda hard to view the ARS as a particularly rigorous training experience for future electronics technicians. Even the "money" you allude to, represented in the business done between radio amateurs and the manufacturers of our radio equipment and accessories, is a spit in the ocean compared to that represented by the commercial broadcasting and communications services. So little, in fact, that the FCC obviously needs to direct it's administrative resources away from amateur radio and toward the commercial services to the greatest extent possible. Sure, services that affect/are used by 10's of millions of people will get more attention ... that's logical. The best way for them to achieve this is to reduce licensing standards to the greatest extent possible, in order to keep from repeatedly dealing with the same issues. That's nonsense ... all they have to do is set reasonable, logical, and justifiable licensing standards and then stick to their guns. I see. Well, on April 14, 2000 we *had* reasonable, logical, and justifiable licensing standards. Someone musta cleaned the glue off of their M-16's that evening, because on April 15, 2000 we suddenly had licensing standards which were dumbed down to a level which can only be viewed as downright silly. Just because some yahoo asks them to do something stupid (like the Petitions for Reconsideration that came out immediately after restucturing, asking the FCC to re-institute 13 and 20 wpm code tests) doesn't mean they have to honor them ... such nonsense should be summarily dismissed with virtually no consumption of FCC resources. Yeah, they'd rather listen to the yahoos that wanted them to reduce licensing standards down to a meaningless level. 73 de Larry, K3LT |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| How does a 6146B fail? | Boatanchors | |||