"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article .net, "Bill
Sohl"
writes:

Personally I think good true conservative idea is to allow people on
the air with no licencing requirements whatsoever, then cull out the
ones that violate the rules.

Wrong. A true conservative desires the least practical government
intervention in life.

A true liberal desires the least practical government intervention in life
as
well.

ROTFLMAO...
Guess I have truly never met such a "true liberal." Every liberal I
hear from is always looking to use more of my money to create
larger and more involved government programs to do ever more
for the "poor, unwashed public".

The devil is in the details of what "least practical government
intervention"
really means.

Just one example: The government used tax dollars to rescue Chrysler about
20
years ago. It turned out to be a good gamble because Chrysler paid back
all of
the money with interest, and in the end it cost the taxpayers nothing.

Now - was the bailout a "liberal" move to save workers' jobs and try to
manage
the economy? Some "conservatives" would say that companies that get in
trouble
should be allowed to fail in a 'free market' and not propped up with tax
dollars.

OTOH, was the bailout a "conservative" move to save investors' money? Or
to
give some help to an industry bedeviled with safety, pollution and economy
regulations *and* the double whammy of foreign competiton and two oil
crises?

Some "liberals" would say that Big Business should not be propped up with
tax
dollars. (Ma's Diner wouldn't get such a bailout)

Clearly a "free-for-all" no license approach
to ham radio wouldn't cut it and, as such, I and other conservative
minded individuals do support ham licensing.

Most "conservatives", anyway. The exact same is said by most "liberals".

Where we depart from
the current approach is in the recognition that the "incentives" of
today's licensing do NOT dovetail with the knowledge needed
to pass the higher level license exams.

Not perfectly, anyway.

Not even very imperfectly.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Bill Sohl" wrote


The important aspect of getting to any truly "new" licensing scheme
absolutly requires either some free upgrades, loss of some privileges
or a combination of both. Hans's view of the future takes into
account a "least" loss approach plus free upgrades. I could easily
support Hans's vision above.

That's not my view of the future, and it FOR DAMNED SURE isn't my "vision".

For a view of my vision, visit http://tinyurl.com/wce9. No losses, and no
freebie upgrades, and elimination of "newcomer ghettos". So much for your
"absolutly (sic) requires".

73, de Hans, K0HB

"JEP" wrote in message
om...
SNIP
YES! No code is killing
ham radio. See you on channel 22 good buddy.

And just what "facts" do you preent to back-up your claim
that: "No Code is killing ham radio?"

Odds are you haven't a single rational example.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"JEP" wrote in message
om...
Check the figures yourself then check how many are really active.

And just "how" do you propose anyone can "check how many
are really active?"

Yes
you can but NRA and AARP rags on the stand. AAA no. I quoted no data,
I made an observation.

Your observation
was absent any clarification that it was only YOUR observation,
unsubstantiated by any true facts.

Get you head out the sand and look around. See
all of your old buddies just hanging around the club meeting doing
nothing? is field day as well attended as it was in the 60's? Are new
folks welcomed? Is help provided?
If so then consider yourself lucky.

One aspect of almost all hobbies" is the cost to play
which often results in an older cross-section of participants.
The same is true for antique cars, model railroading, etc.
Add to that the available "free time" which most older
folks, especially retirees, have.

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"JEP" wrote in message
om...
Just my point. I don't want to belong to ARRL just as I don't care to
belong to AARP, NRA, AAA, Skinheads, etc.

Can you "just buy" the magazines of AARP, NRA, AAA, etc.
without joining? I am always amazed at people that want the "benefits"
of an organization's efforts, in this case the publication, but don't
want
to support the organization by joining. I see the same thing at times
in the antique car hobby. People that bitch about the club rules
at a car show, or otherwise want technical help from club officials
but won't part with the few bucks it takes to join.

I just want to read their
magazine when it has something that interests me. I wouldn't buy it
every month as most of the time it has useless drivel about some
clowntest or whether someone died or some such crap. ARRL and QST have
a short time left as the active Ham population lessens.

Is it lessening? News to me.

If they took a
real survey as to how many real active ham there are they would find
the number far less than they think. I'm not talking about members,
I'm talking about HAMS that really use a radio to transmit a signal.
Doesnt matter what band. How many transmit a signal at least once a
week? Most don't.

Please provide your survey data.

Look at your local HAM clubs, talk to the members(if you can wake them
up). Most show up and act disgusted with the club, Ham radio, life in
general. New folks are never there. Ya I know about your Skywarn in
Flint, MI. Great service! Could be run on CB, NEXTEL, GMRS.

Could be but isn't...there in lies the difference.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"KØHB" wrote in message
news

"Bill Sohl" wrote


The important aspect of getting to any truly "new" licensing scheme
absolutly requires either some free upgrades, loss of some privileges
or a combination of both. Hans's view of the future takes into
account a "least" loss approach plus free upgrades. I could easily
support Hans's vision above.

That's not my view of the future, and it FOR DAMNED SURE isn't my
"vision".

For a view of my vision, visit http://tinyurl.com/wce9. No losses, and no
freebie upgrades, and elimination of "newcomer ghettos". So much for your
"absolutly (sic) requires".
73, de Hans, K0HB

Hans,

Apologies for misunderstanding your position. As to my
view that either freebies or losses are needed to get to a
new license plan, I truly think that will be the case. I doubt
the FCC wants to have a hybred licensing scheme in the
long run. That's my perspective. Assuming "free upgrades"
as was noted in your post, what's the overall harm?

Cheers and Happy New Year.
Bill K2UNK

"Bill Sohl" wrote

Assuming "free upgrades"
as was noted in your post, what's the overall harm?

You're a bright guy, Bill, so surely you can see the "overall harm", but
maybe you're having some trouble shaking off the effects of your New Years
Eve celebration, so I'll spell it out for you.

Today, passing the Amateur Extra exam is the qualification required for full
amateur privileges. An existing General or Advanced licensee has passed a
less comprehensive set of examinations, and has not (by FCC definition)
demonstrated qualification for full amateur privileges.

If FCC suddenly upgrades all General and Advanced licenses to Amateur Extra,
then ipso facto and ipso jure the qualification required for full amateur
privileges has been lowered by two full steps.

Given that sad state of affairs, now any NEW amateur hopefuls can reasonably
plead that any examination more comprehensive than the current General
discriminates against new applicants.

In some circles I've heard that called "the Great Dumbing Down" of amateur
radio.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"KØHB" wrote in message
link.net...

"Bill Sohl" wrote

Assuming "free upgrades"
as was noted in your post, what's the overall harm?

You're a bright guy, Bill, so surely you can see the "overall harm", but
maybe you're having some trouble shaking off the effects of your New Years
Eve celebration, so I'll spell it out for you.

Today, passing the Amateur Extra exam is the qualification required for
full
amateur privileges. An existing General or Advanced licensee has passed a
less comprehensive set of examinations, and has not (by FCC definition)
demonstrated qualification for full amateur privileges.

If FCC suddenly upgrades all General and Advanced licenses to Amateur
Extra,
then ipso facto and ipso jure the qualification required for full amateur
privileges has been lowered by two full steps.

Only on a one-time basis. The question still is, what is the harm of
such a one-time "fix."

Given that sad state of affairs, now any NEW amateur hopefuls can
reasonably
plead that any examination more comprehensive than the current General
discriminates against new applicants.

They can plead all they want...doesn't make it so. The FCC could
certainly counter argue the upgrades were a one-time need to
simplify the overall license structure. YMMV

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
link.net...

"JEP" wrote in message
om...
SNIP
YES! No code is killing
ham radio. See you on channel 22 good buddy.

And just what "facts" do you preent to back-up your claim
that: "No Code is killing ham radio?"

Odds are you haven't a single rational example.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

May I, Bill?

While I do not think No-Code Int'l. is "killing" ham radio, I do believe it
is fostering a bad mindset.

If there were truly no no-code AR license available, I'd agree that the
Morse code exam is a barrier to those who neither possess the "Morse
aptitude" (For lack of a better term.) nor wish to utilize it OTA. However,
there's been a no-code ticket available for over a decade now...with some
pretty generous RF real estate and power limitations I might add.

IMHO, No-Code Int'l. has:

1. Encouraged the idea that it is preferable to lower the requirements
through mass petition rather than encourage individuals to strive toward
higher achievement. Some refer to it as "lowering the bar."

2. Made the notion of more privileges via higher achievement appear as if
it's fundamentally wrong. If one wishes to upgrade, then meet the
requirements necessary to achieve that upgrade. (Not just the requirements
we *want* to meet.)

I've read enough posts here and on the countless code vs. no-code articles
on the various ham radio web forums (As well as the actual RM petitions and
their respective comments.) to confidently say that neither side can claim
an overwhelming numerical advantage over the other. So I think it's safe to
say that not all ascribe to the "barrier" notion.

What will happen? Well, the squeaky wheel gets the oil so I think we can be
reasonably assured of the elimination of Element 1...at least for Technician
"+" privies. Personally, I'm prouder to have achieved rather than squeaked.

73 es HNY de Bert
WA2SI

"Bill Sohl" wrote


Only on a one-time basis.


If N2EY's latest post under "ARS License Numbers" is accurate, and if the
"fix" was instituted today, the number of Amateur Extra licensees would
increase by 213% and the vast majority (69%) of this enlarged "Extra Class"
would not qualify for the license under yesterdays rules or tomorrows rules.




Given that sad state of affairs, now any NEW amateur hopefuls can
reasonably plead that any examination more comprehensive
than the current General discriminates against new applicants.

They can plead all they want...doesn't make it so. The FCC could
certainly counter argue the upgrades were a one-time need to
simplify the overall license structure.

Their counter argument would utterly fail, because they'd first need to
prove that the "one-time need" over-rides the harm of a massive influx of
underqualified (by their own rules) individuals into the top class of
amateur operators. Judges rule on logic, not administrative convenience.


The question still is, what is the harm of such a one-time "fix."


Trivializing this as a one-time "fix" shows how little you've examined the
issue. Instead of a one-time "fix", it would be a one-time "hammer blow".
The answer still is exactly as stated in my previous message.

Cheerios and bran flakes to you to,

K0HB

SNIP again.

Sorry, you'll have to find someone else to talk to on your favorite
frequency.
I don't have any equipment that will transmit there. (But I do have 3 rigs
that cover all of the amateur bands (except the 5 channels at 5 MHz) from
160m-70cm, all modes, and can be run without AC mains power - main station
rig, mobile (I'm in the process of installing that rig in a new vehicle),
and a QRP
station I use for backpack/travel use.)

How many (ham band) rigs do you have? Can you run for extended periods
(weeks or more, if need be) without commercial power? How active and
well-prepared are you?

Oh, you're just trolling? That's become abundantly clear ... why not try
another stream? I think the bites are about to dry up here.

Carl - wk3c

The bites don't seem to drying up at all. I found a few nibbles yet.
The Extras on the no code board have to 5wpm Extras. Couldn't be real
Extras that had at least one exam in front of a FCC examiner. Passed
at least one test at a real FCC examination site. Actually learned
radio theory.
The radios I own are not your concern. I will say I own enough to
operate all bands and modes. Can stay active as long as some kind of
power is still available.Also have had a Ham ticket long enough to
know exactly what the ARRL has really done with the incentive crap
from the 60's. Remember, it was Maxim not the ARRL thst got the
frequencies back after WW 1. Maxim was a mover and shaker, unlike the
deadheads in there now---The Good Ole Boy Club! You guys keep nibbling
because you are afraid to admit you are wrong.