"JJ" wrote in message
...
KØHB wrote:

"N2EY" wrote


And the alphabetic order of license told who was an OT and who was a

newbie.

W3ABC was an OT compared to W3YIK. W3YIK was an OT compared to K3NYT.

K3NYT was

an OT compared to WA3IYC. Etc. Usually, anyway.



Not necessarily. Since we all got a new call sign everytime we moved,
we
might trade an 'old' call in Minnesota (W0ABC) for a 'new' call in
Virginia
(WA4ABC). Not only couldn't you tell how long we'd been licensed, but
you
couldn't tell our license class (except for Novices with KN, WN, or WV
prefixes). My mentor, W0VDI, was licensed at a Tech in 1952 and went SK
50
years later with the same call and the same Tech license.

My call was a re-issue, I received a K prefix call while my friends who
received calls about the same time got WA and WB prefix calls. One had
received his WA call sometime before I got the K call.

And even while some folks were getting K2 calls, the FCC would
occasionally issue someone a W2 call that had gone unassigned for
some time period.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote

And the alphabetic order of license told who was an OT and who was a
newbie.
W3ABC was an OT compared to W3YIK. W3YIK was an OT compared to K3NYT.
K3NYT was
an OT compared to WA3IYC. Etc. Usually, anyway.


Not necessarily.

That's why I wrote "usually".

Since we all got a new call sign everytime we moved, we
might trade an 'old' call in Minnesota (W0ABC) for a 'new' call in Virginia
(WA4ABC).

Only if you moved to another district *and* the corresponding call wasn't
available.

Not only couldn't you tell how long we'd been licensed, but you
couldn't tell our license class (except for Novices with KN, WN, or WV
prefixes). My mentor, W0VDI, was licensed at a Tech in 1952 and went SK 50
years later with the same call and the same Tech license.

Same sort of thing around here. In fact, until recently there was a 1x2 in the
third call district with a Tech license.

If everything was so nice, why was FCC so unhappy with the way things were
going?

It wasn't the FCC who was unhappy.

Then why did they start the ball rolling with all the changes, both in 1951 and
1958/63?

The unhappy folks were a few resentful
and vocal OT's who felt disenfranchised because a nubby new guy could
operate phone on 20M, not having first passed the old class A exam like he
had to.

You mean like W2OY of "no kids no lids no space cadets" fame?

Note also that FCC had upped the ante in the 1951 restructuring. After the end
of 1952 they would no longer issue Advanceds, so anybody who didn't have an
Advanced by that date would have had to get an Extra just to work HF phone on
80 thru 15. Then, just before Christmas 1952, FCC completely reversed itself
and gave all hams except Novices and Techs full operating privileges. Why the
sudden about-face? Nobody seems to know, and the literature of that era only
briefly mentions the change.

The march to disincentive licensing moved to the beat of drum being
banged up in West Hartford, CT.

And a majority of members wanted it. A very slim majority, to be sure.

I know it's hard for you to accept that,
given that history is written by the victors.

And your source for this is?

I know you were a ham then, Hans, but where does this info come from? Or is it
just an opinion?


73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:
In article . net, "KØHB"
writes:


"N2EY" wrote


From 1951 till 1968 the privileges for four license classes, Conditional,

General, Advanced, and Extra were all exactly the same.

No, that's not exactly correct.

The period described started in February of 1953, not 1951.

Whatever.


Point is, FCC spent years developing the new structure, announced it on 1951,
but then just when the tough part of the new rules (requiring an Extra for
amateur HF phone on 80 thru 15), they dumped those rules and gave everybody
except Novices and Techs everything.

You could, however, usually tell the oldtimers from the newbies by the
license class, but that was about all.

Unless someone told you their license class, there was no way of knowing.
There was no 'QRZ.COM' to go check, the CallBook didn't show license class,
and all you could tell by their call sign was where their station was
located. We all played together in the ether as equals.


Except for Novices, whose distinctive callsigns were unmistakeable.

Except for Techs.who had no HF at all and originally no 6 or 2 meters either.

And the alphabetic order of license told who was an OT and who was a newbie.
W3ABC was an OT compared to W3YIK. W3YIK was an OT compared to K3NYT. K3NYT was
an OT compared to WA3IYC. Etc. Usually, anyway.

If everything was so nice, why was FCC so unhappy with the way things were
going? As early as 1958, FCC wanted to know why there were so few Extras. They
asked again in 1963 and made it clear they wanted to bigtime changes.

Personally, I think it was "Sputnik fever". They, like many others in the USA,
were spooked by the early Soviet achievements in space (first artificial
satellite, first animal in space, first pictures of the far side of the moon,
first man in space, first woman in space.....the list goes on and on) and
perceived the USA to need "incentive" in all things technological.

And what a short-lived phenom that was! Now at the university level at
least, the Techies and Engineers to a large extent are not from the US,
while our kids are busy getting MBA's and becoming lawyers!

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Fri, 26 Dec 2003 22:44:52 GMT, Bill Sohl wrote:

I agree with Jim on the "Sputnick fever" reaction. My Earth Science
teached just about went off his rocker when Sputnick went up.

You should have seen what went on inside my then-employer,
Ramo-Wooldridge, the system managers for the USAF ICBM program.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 00:36:08 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote:

And what a short-lived phenom that was! Now at the university level at
least, the Techies and Engineers to a large extent are not from the US,
while our kids are busy getting MBA's and becoming lawyers!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Ya' go where the money is! Engineering is great, but the law, and management
is greater if you're talking from a money angle.

Engineers are workers. They should probably have a division in the UAW, 'cuz
sure as you're born, if you're a worker (employee), you're going to get abused.

Those doing the abusing are the guys with the MBAs.

There are no longer enough jobs to be had to simply leave if you get abused,
you mostly have to take it. If you do leave, chances are you'll just get
abused by different people.

Lawyers hang out a shingle and charge what the traffic will bear. They don't
have someone else setting their pay rates, nor screwing around with their
health insurance, making them sign away their rights to anything they might be
able to think up and patent, etc.

Look at what's happened to programmers. Their livelihood has been destroyed
both by importation of cheap labor (H1B visas) and export of the work entirely
to places like India, Russia, etc. If you move the needle on the idiot meter
at all, you may just get into programming school. Then you can figure
significantly in the unemplyoment statistics, or the "working poor" statistics.

You mostly can't export what an MBA does, nor can cheap foreign labor be
imported to do it. Ditto for the law practicioners.

So, no need to wonder why the kids aren't falling all over themselves to get in
line to be abused.

I think the kids today are smarter than we were...

Dave Head

"KØHB" wrote in message link.net...
"N2EY" wrote


And the alphabetic order of license told who was an OT and who was a
newbie.
W3ABC was an OT compared to W3YIK. W3YIK was an OT compared to K3NYT.
K3NYT was
an OT compared to WA3IYC. Etc. Usually, anyway.


Not necessarily. Since we all got a new call sign everytime we moved, we
might trade an 'old' call in Minnesota (W0ABC) for a 'new' call in Virginia
(WA4ABC). Not only couldn't you tell how long we'd been licensed, but you
couldn't tell our license class (except for Novices with KN, WN, or WV
prefixes).

Hans, that was the old pecking order stuff. I foresee a new ARS where
if you want to know how long an amateur has been licensed, you simply
ask him. And if you want to know the amateur's achievements, you
don't look at how short his call sign is, you look on the air, the
www, and to the journals and see who is doing what. No Merit Badge
system required, but I guess we could move toward hash marks on the
sleeves if need be.

My mentor, W0VDI, was licensed at a Tech in 1952 and went SK 50
years later with the same call and the same Tech license.

Absolutely no shame in that, though some would think so.

Wonder if he put up with 50 years of "encouragement" to "upgrade?"

If everything was so nice, why was FCC so unhappy with the way things were
going?

It wasn't the FCC who was unhappy. The unhappy folks were a few resentful
and vocal OT's who felt disenfranchised because a nubby new guy could
operate phone on 20M, not having first passed the old class A exam like he
had to. The march to disincentive licensing moved to the beat of drum being
banged up in West Hartford, CT. I know it's hard for you to accept that,
given that history is written by the victors.

73, de Hans, K0HB

One ARS, One license (class).

Dave Head wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 00:36:08 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote:


And what a short-lived phenom that was! Now at the university level at
least, the Techies and Engineers to a large extent are not from the US,
while our kids are busy getting MBA's and becoming lawyers!

- Mike KB3EIA -


Ya' go where the money is! Engineering is great, but the law, and management
is greater if you're talking from a money angle.

Engineers are workers. They should probably have a division in the UAW, 'cuz
sure as you're born, if you're a worker (employee), you're going to get abused.

Those doing the abusing are the guys with the MBAs.

There are no longer enough jobs to be had to simply leave if you get abused,
you mostly have to take it. If you do leave, chances are you'll just get
abused by different people.

Lawyers hang out a shingle and charge what the traffic will bear. They don't
have someone else setting their pay rates, nor screwing around with their
health insurance, making them sign away their rights to anything they might be
able to think up and patent, etc.

Look at what's happened to programmers. Their livelihood has been destroyed
both by importation of cheap labor (H1B visas) and export of the work entirely
to places like India, Russia, etc. If you move the needle on the idiot meter
at all, you may just get into programming school. Then you can figure
significantly in the unemplyoment statistics, or the "working poor" statistics.

You mostly can't export what an MBA does, nor can cheap foreign labor be
imported to do it. Ditto for the law practicioners.

So, no need to wonder why the kids aren't falling all over themselves to get in
line to be abused.

I think the kids today are smarter than we were...

I doubt it! Capitalism is a grand thing, but it destroys the people who
practice it if they don't have a guiding principle beyond pecuniary
accumulation.

Want to know what happens to us when we are all MBA's and lawyers and
the rest of the world is doing all the manufacturing and the things too
*low* for us? It isn't going to be pretty!

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 19:17:21 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote:

Dave Head wrote:
On Sat, 27 Dec 2003 00:36:08 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote:


And what a short-lived phenom that was! Now at the university level at
least, the Techies and Engineers to a large extent are not from the US,
while our kids are busy getting MBA's and becoming lawyers!

- Mike KB3EIA -


Ya' go where the money is! Engineering is great, but the law, and management
is greater if you're talking from a money angle.

Engineers are workers. They should probably have a division in the UAW, 'cuz
sure as you're born, if you're a worker (employee), you're going to get abused.

Those doing the abusing are the guys with the MBAs.

There are no longer enough jobs to be had to simply leave if you get abused,
you mostly have to take it. If you do leave, chances are you'll just get
abused by different people.

Lawyers hang out a shingle and charge what the traffic will bear. They don't
have someone else setting their pay rates, nor screwing around with their
health insurance, making them sign away their rights to anything they might be
able to think up and patent, etc.

Look at what's happened to programmers. Their livelihood has been destroyed
both by importation of cheap labor (H1B visas) and export of the work entirely
to places like India, Russia, etc. If you move the needle on the idiot meter
at all, you may just get into programming school. Then you can figure
significantly in the unemplyoment statistics, or the "working poor" statistics.

You mostly can't export what an MBA does, nor can cheap foreign labor be
imported to do it. Ditto for the law practicioners.

So, no need to wonder why the kids aren't falling all over themselves to get in
line to be abused.

I think the kids today are smarter than we were...

I doubt it! Capitalism is a grand thing, but it destroys the people who
practice it if they don't have a guiding principle beyond pecuniary
accumulation.

With 30 million people in this country laboring at equal to or less than the
$8.25 / hr wage that the government defines as poverty level, that would pretty
much say that, "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

Want to know what happens to us when we are all MBA's and lawyers and
the rest of the world is doing all the manufacturing and the things too
*low* for us? It isn't going to be pretty!

All we have to do is wait - we'll find out. Doesn't matter if its Democrats or
Republicans, nobody's gonna do anything for workers any more. It has to do
with the waning of union power, I think, and the mistake that "tech" people
including engineers make that they don't need a union. If you're an employee,
you need a union. Period. But the IT bunch won't join one, and look what
happened to them.

Engineers are next.

Even people at the top of the pay scale - pro ball players, actors, etc - have
unions. Why do techs think they're so indispensible as to not need one?

Dave Head

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 13:18:03 GMT, Dave Head wrote:

Engineers are workers. They should probably have a division in the
UAW, 'cuz sure as you're born, if you're a worker (employee), you're
going to get abused.

There have been engineer's unions for at least the last 50 years in
the aircradt industry. Having worked one year as an engineer for an
airplane company at the beginning of my career, I can see why. Real
professionals look down on unionizing.

Those doing the abusing are the guys with the MBAs.

Read it not as ab-using, but as con-fusing.

Lawyers hang out a shingle and charge what the traffic will bear.
They don't have someone else setting their pay rates, nor screwing
around with their health insurance, making them sign away their rights
to anything they might be able to think up and patent, etc.

HAH! Talk to any associate at any decent-sized law firm and get an
education otherwise.

As for going solo - did it, been there, got the T-shirt, and I
wouldn't do it again. I love to do law - I hate to run a business.

You mostly can't export what an MBA does,

Give it time, my man - they used to say the same thing about
engineers.

nor can cheap foreign labor be imported to do it. Ditto for the law
practicioners.

Wanna bet? The top two guys in my law school class were from India,
and that was many years ago. One is also an MBA and CPA and runs
his family's extensive business interests in the 'States, and the
other is one of the top immigration lawyers in California.

It's easy to make such generalities.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Retired and loving every minute of it....
Work was getting in the way of my hobbies

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 23:52:34 GMT, "Phil Kane"
wrote:

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 13:18:03 GMT, Dave Head wrote:

Engineers are workers. They should probably have a division in the
UAW, 'cuz sure as you're born, if you're a worker (employee), you're
going to get abused.

There have been engineer's unions for at least the last 50 years in
the aircradt industry. Having worked one year as an engineer for an
airplane company at the beginning of my career, I can see why. Real
professionals look down on unionizing.

Real professional actors, football players, baseball players, etc. don't seem
to look down on unionization.

My guess is that the airplane engineers get screwed less, and have more secure
jobs, save the periodic downturns in the aircraft industry itself.

Those doing the abusing are the guys with the MBAs.

Read it not as ab-using, but as con-fusing.

Lawyers hang out a shingle and charge what the traffic will bear.
They don't have someone else setting their pay rates, nor screwing
around with their health insurance, making them sign away their rights
to anything they might be able to think up and patent, etc.

HAH! Talk to any associate at any decent-sized law firm and get an
education otherwise.

I bet, but then there's that "organization" thing. Work for an organization
(be an employee) and... you need a union.

As for going solo - did it, been there, got the T-shirt, and I
wouldn't do it again. I love to do law - I hate to run a business.

I'd hate it too, I think.

You mostly can't export what an MBA does,

Give it time, my man - they used to say the same thing about
engineers.

MBA's are performing a service where they have to be present. They're not
going to offshore the pizza delivery guy, either - he has to be here to do the
work, too. Of course, entire corporate headquarters have moved off-shore I
guess, so apparently it is possible.

nor can cheap foreign labor be imported to do it. Ditto for the law
practicioners.

Wanna bet? The top two guys in my law school class were from India,
and that was many years ago. One is also an MBA and CPA and runs
his family's extensive business interests in the 'States, and the
other is one of the top immigration lawyers in California.

I suppose if they are educated here... sure. But growing up in India, Russia,
Korea, and learning Indian, Russian, or Korean law won't do you any good in the
USA. The problem with engineering and IT is that the laws of physics, and the
principles of good software design and construction, are universal. What works
in India, Russia, and Korea works here, and vice-versa.

It's easy to make such generalities.

The generality that holds is: If you are an employee, you need a union. I
think exceptions are pretty rare. Again, the number of people, 30 million, in
poverty-level wage jobs (= $8.25 / hr) pretty much says that this is right.
All those people would likely do much better with a union.

I'm a government engineer. I work for the Navy. Don't need a union, right?
Wrong! In the 1980's, the OPM illegally capped the across the board raises of
engineers on the advanced engineering pay scale. Who should step up to the
plate but the Treasury Employee's Union, and sued the socks off the government
for 2 decades. Finally won the case last year. Last week I got a check as
partial payment for compensation for that misdeed - $1090.95. Unions don't
have to strike to get results, even if the results come later. Maybe the OPM
will realize eventually that even tho they're the government, they're not
omnipotent, and have to play by the rules, like everyone else. Anyway, I'm
better off because of a union.

Without a resurgence of union power, I think this country is headed for a
third-world model society, where there are the very rich, and the very poor,
and nobody in between. The people slinging code and designing/building bridges
won't be on the "very rich" side, either. They'll be the ones that are willing
to work for $8.00 / hr, side-by-side with the Indians, Mexicans, Russians, etc.
that will be quite happy with that amount. Its a matter of how far in the
future that is... I guess about 50 years. What's your guess?

Dave Head