From: (Michael Black) on Sun 29 May 2005
16:48


Joe Cameltoe ) writes:
On Sat, 28 May 2005 19:42:14 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

My experiences with programs like "bring your sons and daughters to
work day" shows that almost none of the kids is even thinking of a
technical field. A lot want to be lawyers.

Once in the past, we were scared into thinking that maybe science and
technology was maybe not such a bad thing. That happened when the
commies launched Sputnik. Suddenly it seemed important that at least
some of our kids decided to work in the sciences. Hopefully we will
decide that again without having to be shocked into it.

I am pretty firmly convinced that until we stop catering to the least
common denominator, until we stop marginalizing the technically and
scientifically inclined, we will not find many youngsters who want to
come into our hobby.

- Mike KB3EIA -

The answer is simple:

They're lazy and have NO imaginations. They want the easy, don't
have to do/learn anything way. Look at all the retards on thier cellphones
EVERY FREAKING MINUTE of the day.

The problem with that is that you've just alienated the very group
that needs to be part of amateur radio (for the hobby, for them).
YOu can't go into a room full of people you want to attract and
call them names.

I do argue that the failure of amateur radio to attract young
people is because we a) aren't trying and b)don't know how.

Good, thoughtful commentary, Michael.

Part of the problem is the evident posturing of some on these
newsgroups, the self-importance that some generate about
their particular hobby interest. A few become "insulted"
when others talk about a "hobby," yet that is what it is and
that is what it has always been. A hobby, per se, is not
a derogatory label...except to the posturing self-important
individuals who fantasize that they more than they are.

Those who are IN a particular activity are often guilty of
tunnel-vision that focusses too much on their own favored
interest. Once locked into that "camera setting," they've
lost their field of view on a wide panorama.

The minute you characterize all the young as some monolithic group,
you are saying you don't know the kids, and if you don't know
them, then there's no way of bridging that gap. I'm not sure how
we do it, but I do know that one has to get into their heads to
reach them.

Heh heh, I've heard the particular lament of "we can't get
these (darn) kids to LISTEN to us!" for lots of generations
and have read of the same thing in books printed before I
existed. :-) It's a VERY common parental angst.

One thing that teachers learn - if they are good at teaching -
is to NEVER TALK DOWN to students...not even if one is boiling
over inside because they "won't listen." :-) The problem is
really in the teacher being unable to properly teach. That
applies to ANY subject and ANYONE explaining something. The
"teacher" has to address the subject, put the spotlight on it
and avoid shining the spotlight on themselves. The subject
will be new to the "students" but the "teacher" is familiar.

"Teachers" have to know much more about the subject than
their "lesson plan." They have to organize their "teaching"
into a comprehensible, learnable flow of ideas and concepts
that "students" can mentally digest (difficult but obviously
not impossible). Knowing more about the subject than the
"plan outline," allows them to field interruptions of some
"students" about bits and pieces of the subject that they
might have already learned. Such "students" could be
lightly disciplined "in class" with something like "that's
true, but let's bring that up later after we look at the
overall picture (of this subject)." There's lots of similar
ways to keep control on "teaching" a subject to a group.

Keep in mind that decades ago, amateur radio was hardly a mainstreem
interest among the population. SOme would be interested, many would
not.

That's true but way too many (in here at least) want to get
"insulted" from an apparent "attack" on what they do! :-)

Having spent over a half century IN radio and electronics,
having been to many places, being a member of the IEEE for
32 years, my observation (shared with others) is that the
"technical people" got INTO technology because it was
interesting to them personally...WITHOUT having to go
through the licensed amateur radio route. Far more non-
amateurs in professional electronics than those who might
have gotten a ham ticket during their teen-age years.

All of electronics can be a technological marvel which is
found truly fascinating by thousands upon thousands. That
extends much farther than just HF radio in hobbies. Robotics
is one huge and growing hobby area right now. "Computing"
already has dozens of major hobby groups within it, all made
possible by desktop sized computers with enormous capabilities
that didn't exist two decades ago.

Devotees of amateur HF "operating" tend to look down their
noses at those "other" hobbies, posturing that "they don't
have the smarts to do the 'great' things that 'we' did"
yet few are able to comprehend that those "other" hobbies
require as much or more intellect than theirs.

There'd be people like you back then characterizing the young
people, minus the cellphones, basically saying the same thing.

Heh heh heh. True enough. Way too many conveniently
neglect the fact that they were young once and "guilty" of
the very same faults of their generation.

The technical phenomenon of cellular telephony has put
roughly 100 MILLION cell phones into the USA population.
[statement of the U.S. Census Bureau over two years ago
based on cell phone subscriptions here as one in three
of the population] Cell phones (little two-way radios in
themselves) are just extensions of a general need to
communicate amongst one's peer group...little different
from wired telephone use by teenagers a half century ago.
Using cell phones as a "hobby" is wrong. Semi-private
communications is a social group act, not a hobby.

Those who are too IN to their particular hobby (such as
amateur radio) have lost sight of how widespread and
pervasive the entire world of "radio" has become. They've
lost sight of that other technical phenomenon, the Internet
with its ability to reach most of the world without any
ionospheric perterbations affecting HF bands. They've
become ignorant to the fact that the rest of the "radio"
world has gone beyond HF, that HF is NOT the Holy Grail
of communications means nor are the very early skills
of "radio operating" some kind of ultimate test of
"skill."

Ultimately, little has changed.

True enough. History - as far as some folks' attitudes -
DOES repeat itself, again and again. :-)

The paradigms of yesterday just DON'T apply today. Those
reasons for being have been crowded out with a cornucopia
of NEW, challenging avocations affordable by most. The
world and technology has CHANGED. Some people haven't.

The inability to change, to accept change, may be a human
survival trait? The "familiar" represents "security." It
is known. To be good at something is comforting, reassuring.
To individuals. But, the overall "tribe" has accepted
change, accepted it, and is enjoying it.

wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

Many people lament that there is not enough interest
in Ham radio by young people.


Agreed - but how much would be enough?

Dunno. I personally agree somewhat with Brian K's assertion that the
absolute number of Hams could indeed drop without serious problems.

On the other hand, I believe that we should have a good mix of ages.

There are often many reasons given for this deficiency,
and somewhat less "fixes".

One of the reasons that is given very often is that
Amateur radio is in some sort of competition with the
Internet.


Every activity is in competition with every other.

Surely. Comparisons between the two show that Amateur radio is a tad
bit more involved than buying a computer, doing a dialup and surfing the
net. Will a person who's idea of a hobby is clicking a mouse button find
Amateur radio a tad intimidating?


What is the competition between the two? In order to use
the internet,
one must of course have a computer. It must be connected to the
internet, through one of several methods. Once the person has
learned to
turn on the computer, open a few programs or so, they have
the necessary skills to work the internet.


Yup. But there's mo

A computer has many uses, from being a glorified typewriter to a
serious research/calculation device to gaming to producing all sorts of
multimedia stuff.

Don't forget surfing porn. A great way to build character! 8^)

Most decent white-collar jobs today require computer skills. Many
blue-collar jobs also require them.

Amateur radio on the other hand, requires that a radio be used,
which
requires some skill in operating. An antenna system needs to be
connected to this radio. Whereas it is possible to have
everything set
up for the Ham, most young people do not have the resources to
have
someone set up their system. Coupled with the possibility of
putting an
antenna in operation that only costs a few dollars, or even
less if the
youngster has good scrounging skills, the likelihood is that
they would
design and put up their own antenna, another skill needed.

So there is a large difference in the skills needed for the
two hobbies.


You're missing a couple of other points, Mike.

Computers are all over the place, inexpensive, and often available as
hand-me-downs. PCs only a few years old can be had for next-to-nothing.

Not missing a point. To me, computers are like underwear - pretty much
gotta have it.

Some people live in places where putting up an antenna - *any* antenna
- is banned by CC&Rs. A family isn't likely to move so that Junior can
put up a G5RV.

Heh! i had a thought -maybe we could get some of the rebellious types
to go stealth! 8^)


Cell phones as competition? While there is a temptation
to snipe "Get Real!", I'll address those too.

What would make a person decide to take up Cell phone
use as a hobby?
Cell phones allow you to talk to people that you know
(for the most
part) and operate in the same manner as a regular telephone,
save that
you take the cell with you, and you are generally tied in
the same
building with a standard telephone. It's hard to imagine
someone doing
that as a hobby, although there are a lot of people who
spend a lot of time using them.


You missed the point, Mike.

Before cell phones became inexpensive and ubiquitous, the
average person didn't have many options for personal
mobile/portable communications. There was ham radio and
cb and not much else. Cell phones changed all that.

Actually, I think you missed my point! My point is that if a person is
making a choice of hobbies to get into, the concept of choosing between
Amateur radio and using a cell phone just isn't in the mix. I see trendy
teens with cell phones glued to their heads every day. I can only assume
that they spend hours each day on them. I can guarantee that that kid
has never considered amateur radio as a hobby. I doubt they consider
their cells as a hobby either. So it is pretty hard to think of that as
competition.

I have two cell phones, a few computers, spend a lot of time on the
internet in my job and off work, and I cannot explain the seeming
exclusivity ascribed to the them as related to my Ham license.


So what makes a youngster decide to become a Ham?

Same things that make anyone else.

We can try using the input of those who became Hams at a
young age.
Most of what I have heard is that the person was very
interested in the
technical aspects involved with getting on the air.
Making antennas,
building rigs, and getting them on the air was a big
part of the attraction.


I was one of those people - licensed at age 13. With no
real help from the parents, btw.

In the end, I believe that it is young people
that have a technical
interest that will likely become Hams.


More complex than that.

There are three basic areas of interest involved:

1) Technical (likes to fool around with radio stuff)

2) Operating (likes the actual operating experience)

3) Communicating (likes the message content more than
the medium)

Most hams' reasons for getting into the ARS are a mixture
of the three.

For example, I know some DXers whose main focus is #2. They
love the thrill of the chase, hunting down the new ones, etc.
Their stations are technical wonders - but the technical stuff
is simply a means to an end, not the end in itself.

Then there are the ragchew types who have real long-term friendships
on-air. Their focus is mainly #3.

Or the techno types who are always working on a project but rarely on
the air. Once they get something working really well, the excitement is
gone and they're off to something else.


And that, I believe, is the crux of the issue.


I think it's more complex.


America is not a place that encourages those who might be
thinking of a
technical career. We have a tendency to encourage a more
"pop culture"
outlook, which as often as not discounts actual learning
for "street
cred", and actually turns the smart person into an object of
ridicule.
There are levels, and there are levels. If a person is
intelligent, and
wants a good livelihood, you will find careers that are
acceptable. You
can be a movie star, or perhaps a lawyer. A whole spectrum
follows, but
engineering and the technical fields are not very high on that
list.


Agreed.

How often is the Techie portrayed as a sort of Bill Nye,
the science guy type (at best).


How many TV shows and movies ever depict engineering or
technical folks at all, compared to other fields like health
care or law enforcement?

And we've only had a gazillion shows about that kind of stuff.

One show made a start toward a good positive presentation of engineers
and techies. It was Star Trek. The original series had a very kind
treatment of Scottie, the engineer.


How about the smart woman who takes off her glasses
and suddenly becomes the hot babe?


Bailey Quarters. Although she's hot with the glasses *on*, as well..


I'll bet you liked Marcia Strassman too!


Professor Frink on "The Simpsons"?
Pop culture is not kind to the technical types.


Been that way for a long time, Mike.

My experiences with programs like "bring your sons and
daughters to
work day" shows that almost none of the kids is even thinking
of a
technical field. A lot want to be lawyers.

Or business types, or a lot of other things.

Yup. I don't know if you heard about this, but there are some people
who want to bring proposition 19 into the whole of education.

I can see it now, young women being forced to become engineers.....


Once in the past, we were scared into thinking that maybe
science and
technology was maybe not such a bad thing. That happened when
the commies launched Sputnik.


Yeah - who'd a thunk they could do something like that?

Suddenly it seemed important that at least
some of our kids decided to work in the sciences. Hopefully
we will
decide that again without having to be shocked into it.


No, today is worse. The society seems unshockable. Look at where
so much stuff today is made...

I share your concern. BTW, the place where so much of our "stuff" is
made is not our friend.

I am pretty firmly convinced that until we stop catering
to the least
common denominator, until we stop marginalizing the
technically and
scientifically inclined, we will not find many youngsters
who want to come into our hobby.


The fact of the matter is that amateur radio has always been
a rather specialized activity anyway.

No argument there.

I graduated high school in 1972 - the golden age of space
and technology, right?

Well, pretty close to the end of it....

In my high school of 2500 boys there were at most six licensed
hams. In the girls' school next door there were *none*. 5000
middle class kids in suburban Philly, going to schools where the
emphasis was on math and science, and there were but a handful of
hams. And this was in an era before CC&Rs, cable TV, VCRs, cell
phones, PCs, etc.

My basic thesis is that we as a society are moving toward the
celebration of the ordinary, the mundane. We have lost our edge. And
that can only last for so long.

If we can celebrate those who *DO* things instead of simply consume
things, we might reverse that trend.


73 de Jim, N2EY

The most popular highschool technical activity back then was working on
cars. A kid with a few tools and skills could get a few dollars
together, buy an old heap and get on the road.

Been there, done that. 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -

From: Mike Coslo on May 29, 9:57 pm


wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

Many people lament that there is not enough interest
in Ham radio by young people.

Agreed - but how much would be enough?

Dunno. I personally agree somewhat with Brian K's assertion that the
absolute number of Hams could indeed drop without serious problems.

On the other hand, I believe that we should have a good mix of ages.

Younger hobbyists have to be there to "take orders" from the
older ones? :-)

There are often many reasons given for this deficiency,
and somewhat less "fixes".

One of the reasons that is given very often is that
Amateur radio is in some sort of competition with the
Internet.

Every activity is in competition with every other.

Among teen-agers? How can you possibly say that? :-)

Surely. Comparisons between the two show that Amateur radio is a tad
bit more involved than buying a computer, doing a dialup and surfing the
net. Will a person who's idea of a hobby is clicking a mouse button find
Amateur radio a tad intimidating?

Tsk, tsk. Ham speak with forked tongue on inpugning "no
intellect required." A sort of Deus Ex Mousina attitude.

Mike, you were never into computers and BBSs before the
Macintosh mouse debuted, were you? Lots and lots of ALL
ages were BBSing, having a great time without the GUI, well
before Windows, when not on-line they were doing programming,
writing games, "unprotecting" protected disks, experimenting
with the first modem advancements, etc. Budding authors were
practicing writing and established writers were generating
manuscripts with relative ease. Accounting people had
discovered the first spreadsheets and increased the efficiency
of their inventory, financial records, establishing both
schedules and prices of products they were making. ALL
BEFORE the advent of either the computer Mouse or GUI.

To get an HF transceiver in their vehicles, both young and
old could buy a set of transceiver, antenna, microphone for
under $200 from Sears, K-Mart, Wall-Mart, etc. in the
morning and have it installed and working in the afternoon.
Of course that was "CB" and therefore "lowly" and, to some,
"criminal." :-) [all before the GUI and mouse]

I have to admit that putting up one's ham station DOES
take some smarts. One copies an antenna design out of the
ARRL Antenna Handbook, getting somewhat close to the
dimensions. One can copy a whole transceiver design out
of the ARRL Handbook, then rescue themselves by scrapping
the unworking project with a ready-built transceiver bought
at HRO (reviews of performance presented by the "ARRL Lab"
and published in QST). They can even buy coax cable
assemblies when they are unable to put on PL-259s right,
even buy whole antenna kits. I'd say that was "plug and
play" on the same order as PCs, but before Microsith
came out with that marketing/sales phrase. :-)


A computer has many uses, from being a glorified typewriter to a
serious research/calculation device to gaming to producing all sorts of
multimedia stuff.

Don't forget surfing porn. A great way to build character! 8^)

Tsk, Mike. You never saw "dirty pictures" elsewhere (not over a
computer) when you were "building (your own) character?" :-)

Most decent white-collar jobs today require computer skills. Many
blue-collar jobs also require them.

True enough. There aren't a lot of businesses or
corporations that need "ham radio skills" (even discounting
morse code). Back before the GUI and computer mousies,
push-to-talk two-way radios were common in business large
and small, with public safety organizations, in the military,
and in government. All easy to use...and NOT on amateur
bands nor needing morse code skills.


Not missing a point. To me, computers are like underwear - pretty much
gotta have it.

I've not seen any "HANES" computer bramds in stores...


Some people live in places where putting up an antenna - *any* antenna
- is banned by CC&Rs. A family isn't likely to move so that Junior can
put up a G5RV.

Unless either of you have some NEW info courtesy of the U.S. Census
Bureau, you will find the MOST residences in the USA do NOT have
such restrictions.

Heh! i had a thought -maybe we could get some of the rebellious types
to go stealth! 8^)

You haven't heard of MOBILE or even HAND-HELD transceivers?!?


Actually, I think you missed my point! My point is that if a person is
making a choice of hobbies to get into, the concept of choosing between
Amateur radio and using a cell phone just isn't in the mix. I see trendy
teens with cell phones glued to their heads every day. I can only assume
that they spend hours each day on them. I can guarantee that that kid
has never considered amateur radio as a hobby.

How do you present this "guarantee?" In writing? From "long
experience" in observation? [remember there are a few of us
who've been around longer and seen MORE teeners - even been one
once - have MANY DIFFERENT observations of others over the past
half century]

I doubt they consider
their cells as a hobby either. So it is pretty hard to think of that as
competition.

Competition for teeners' TIME. They have the same 24 hours a
day as adults and infants, the same need to sleep, eat, and do
other things (such as attend school).



How many TV shows and movies ever depict engineering or
technical folks at all, compared to other fields like health
care or law enforcement?

TV shows and Movies are for ENTERTAINMENT of enough
customers that will pay the Producers of same...and artists.
Entertainment shows go for the Emotions of the audience.


One show made a start toward a good positive presentation of engineers
and techies. It was Star Trek. The original series had a very kind
treatment of Scottie, the engineer.

...who ran the works of a SPACESHIP (circa 1967) as
thunk up by MOVIE people, the Producers, the Writers,
the scenery and prop designers. NOT "techie" insofar as
our then-present society was. EMOTION stuff, NOT
education.


I graduated high school in 1972 - the golden age of space
and technology, right?

Well, pretty close to the end of it....

NOT EVEN CLOSE. Having been IN the "space business" since
1964 and working for the manufacturer of the Space Shuttle
Main Engine (as well as the Apollo first-stage engine), you
both missed the Space Shuttle program and well over a
hundred STS missions. You've MISSED the unmanned vehicle
missions and negated the tremendous data gathered by the
Mars rovers and the trips to the outer edges of our solar
system. You two have completely ignored when the "personal
computer" made its debuts beginning in the mid-1970s, and
suddenly skyrocketing after 1980. You've missed the first
computer networking of BBSs that began in the late 1970s
or have recognized the Internet phenomenon happening after
it went public in 1991. Perhaps you've both become too
blase' about computers and the Internet?


My basic thesis is that we as a society are moving toward the
celebration of the ordinary, the mundane. We have lost our edge. And
that can only last for so long.

Tsk, your own middle-age angst is mumbling. :-)

I've heard the SAME sort of complaint by others about their
generations' folly for about six decades. :-)

If we can celebrate those who *DO* things instead of simply consume
things, we might reverse that trend.

That has been going on in nearly all technological endeavors
for as long as I can remember. The DO-ers are celebrated.
A survey of the IEEE Milestone history program in electronics
demonstrates that, a program that is shared with other
technological associations. The birth of the first "hard
drive" has been Milestoned recently...IBM's RAMAC and the
Model 350 disk storage system (1956) out of a small IBM
lab in Silicon Valley.

But, to be celebrated, you MUST do something that others
consider more remarkable than average. Your own personal
accomplishment is NOT enough. One isn't a DO-er just by
making something and showing it on the Internet to a wide
ranging viewing audience, then proclaiming its "greatness."
Neither is one a DO-er by explaining what they "will" do
and expecting plaudits BEFORE they've ever done anything.

wrote:
From: Mike Coslo on May 29, 9:57 pm

NOT EVEN CLOSE. Having been IN the "space business" since
1964 and working for the manufacturer of the Space Shuttle
Main Engine...(SNIP)

Even aerospace industries have to hire janitors, Lennie...I am
sure you were very enthusiastic in your duties.

Steve, K4YZ

Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

Many people lament that there is not enough interest
in Ham radio by young people.

Agreed - but how much would be enough?

Dunno. I personally agree somewhat with Brian K's
assertion that the
absolute number of Hams could indeed drop without
serious problems.

It's happening already.

The important number is how many *active* hams there are.

On the other hand, I believe that we should have a good
mix of ages.

Sure - but how much is enough? If, say, 10% of the US amateur
population were under the age of 21, would that be enough?

How would it compare to the way things were 10, 20, 30 years ago?

Looking around at hamfests and club meetings isn't necessarily
a representative sample of the ham population.

There are often many reasons given for this deficiency,
and somewhat less "fixes".

One thing is for su Adding an age requirement, as proposed
to FCC by one frequent poster here, isn't a fix nor a good
idea.

One of the reasons that is given very often is that
Amateur radio is in some sort of competition with the
Internet.

Every activity is in competition with every other.

Surely. Comparisons between the two show that Amateur
radio is a tad
bit more involved than buying a computer, doing a dialup
and surfing the
net. Will a person who's idea of a hobby is clicking a mouse
button find
Amateur radio a tad intimidating?

More than a tad!

What is the competition between the two? In order to use
the internet,
one must of course have a computer. It must be connected to
the
internet, through one of several methods. Once the person has
learned to
turn on the computer, open a few programs or so, they have
the necessary skills to work the internet.

Yup. But there's mo

A computer has many uses, from being a glorified typewriter
to a
serious research/calculation device to gaming to
producing all sorts of multimedia stuff.

Don't forget surfing porn. A great way to build character! 8^)

See "all sorts of multimedia stuff".

Most decent white-collar jobs today require computer
skills. Many blue-collar jobs also require them.

Amateur radio on the other hand, requires that a
radio be used, which
requires some skill in operating. An antenna system
needs to be
connected to this radio. Whereas it is possible to have
everything set
up for the Ham, most young people do not have the resources to
have
someone set up their system. Coupled with the possibility of
putting an
antenna in operation that only costs a few dollars, or even
less if the
youngster has good scrounging skills, the likelihood is that
they would
design and put up their own antenna, another skill needed.

So there is a large difference in the skills needed for the
two hobbies.


You're missing a couple of other points, Mike.

Computers are all over the place, inexpensive, and
often available as
hand-me-downs. PCs only a few years old can be had
for next-to-nothing.

Not missing a point. To me, computers are like underwear -
pretty much gotta have it.

And like underwear, there are some things better done without
computers...

Some people live in places where putting up an
antenna - *any* antenna
- is banned by CC&Rs. A family isn't likely to
move so that Junior can put up a G5RV.

Heh! i had a thought -maybe we could get some of the
rebellious types to go stealth! 8^)

A few might.

Cell phones as competition? While there is a temptation
to snipe "Get Real!", I'll address those too.

What would make a person decide to take up Cell phone
use as a hobby?
Cell phones allow you to talk to people that you know
(for the most
part) and operate in the same manner as a regular telephone,
save that
you take the cell with you, and you are generally tied in
the same
building with a standard telephone. It's hard to imagine
someone doing
that as a hobby, although there are a lot of people who
spend a lot of time using them.

You missed the point, Mike.

Before cell phones became inexpensive and ubiquitous, the
average person didn't have many options for personal
mobile/portable communications. There was ham radio and
cb and not much else. Cell phones changed all that.

Actually, I think you missed my point! My point is that
if a person is
making a choice of hobbies to get into, the concept of
choosing between
Amateur radio and using a cell phone just isn't in the mix.
I see trendy
teens with cell phones glued to their heads every day.
I can only assume
that they spend hours each day on them.

Maybe - but kids spending lots of time on the 'phone isn't
a new thing at all. Goes back to the '50s at least.

I can guarantee that that kid
has never considered amateur radio as a hobby.
I doubt they consider
their cells as a hobby either.

Means to an end, not an end in itself.

So it is pretty hard to think of that as competition.

Here's how:

Back before cell phones, one "selling point" for ham radio
was something like "if you and your friends got ham licenses,
you could talk all you want without tying up the 'phone."
Another was that repeaters extended the range of an HT, mobile
or compromise home station enormously.

Of course that's a "means to an end" application - the goal is
talking to the friends, the radio part is simply how it's done.

20 years ago such a "sales pitch" made sense. Today, in most
places, the response would be to simply get a cell phone.

I have two cell phones, a few computers, spend a lot of
time on the
internet in my job and off work, and I cannot explain
the seeming
exclusivity ascribed to the them as related to my Ham license.

Time spent on them is not time on the air.

So what makes a youngster decide to become a Ham?

Same things that make anyone else.

We can try using the input of those who became Hams at a
young age.
Most of what I have heard is that the person was very
interested in the
technical aspects involved with getting on the air.
Making antennas,
building rigs, and getting them on the air was a big
part of the attraction.

I was one of those people - licensed at age 13. With no
real help from the parents, btw.

In the end, I believe that it is young people
that have a technical
interest that will likely become Hams.

More complex than that.

There are three basic areas of interest involved:

1) Technical (likes to fool around with radio stuff)

2) Operating (likes the actual operating experience)

3) Communicating (likes the message content more than
the medium)

Most hams' reasons for getting into the ARS are a mixture
of the three.

For example, I know some DXers whose main focus is #2. They
love the thrill of the chase, hunting down the new ones, etc.
Their stations are technical wonders - but the technical stuff
is simply a means to an end, not the end in itself.

Then there are the ragchew types who have real
long-term friendships
on-air. Their focus is mainly #3.

Or the techno types who are always working on a project
but rarely on
the air. Once they get something working really well,
the excitement is
gone and they're off to something else.

And that, I believe, is the crux of the issue.

I think it's more complex.

America is not a place that encourages those who might be
thinking of a
technical career. We have a tendency to encourage a more
"pop culture"
outlook, which as often as not discounts actual learning
for "street
cred", and actually turns the smart person into an object of
ridicule.
There are levels, and there are levels. If a person is
intelligent, and
wants a good livelihood, you will find careers that are
acceptable. You
can be a movie star, or perhaps a lawyer. A whole spectrum
follows, but
engineering and the technical fields are not very high on that
list.

Agreed.

How often is the Techie portrayed as a sort of Bill Nye,
the science guy type (at best).

How many TV shows and movies ever depict engineering or
technical folks at all, compared to other fields like health
care or law enforcement?

And we've only had a gazillion shows about that kind of stuff.

Bingo.

One show made a start toward a good positive presentation
of engineers
and techies. It was Star Trek. The original series had a
very kind treatment of Scottie, the engineer.

The portrayal of the engineer as a Scot is a classic stereotype. Goes
back to "MacAndrew's Hymn" at least.

How about the smart woman who takes off her glasses
and suddenly becomes the hot babe?

Bailey Quarters. Although she's hot with the
glasses *on*, as well..

I'll bet you liked Marcia Strassman too!

Of course - Mrs. Kotter...

Professor Frink on "The Simpsons"?
Pop culture is not kind to the technical types.

Been that way for a long time, Mike.

My experiences with programs like "bring your sons and
daughters to
work day" shows that almost none of the kids is even thinking
of a
technical field. A lot want to be lawyers.

Or business types, or a lot of other things.

Yup. I don't know if you heard about this, but there are
some people
who want to bring proposition 19 into the whole of education.

I can see it now, young women being forced to become
engineers.....

There's a big difference between equality of opportunity and
equality of result.

Look what happened to the guy at Harvard...

Once in the past, we were scared into thinking that maybe
science and
technology was maybe not such a bad thing. That happened when
the commies launched Sputnik.

Yeah - who'd a thunk they could do something like that?

Suddenly it seemed important that at least
some of our kids decided to work in the sciences. Hopefully
we will
decide that again without having to be shocked into it.

No, today is worse. The society seems unshockable.
Look at where
so much stuff today is made...

I share your concern. BTW, the place where so much of
our "stuff" is made is not our friend.

Sure they are - as long as we play by *their* rules.

Part of the problem goes back decades, to when the USA decided
that certain sectors of manufacturing could be dominated by
imports.

I am pretty firmly convinced that until we stop catering
to the least
common denominator, until we stop marginalizing the
technically and
scientifically inclined, we will not find many youngsters
who want to come into our hobby.

The fact of the matter is that amateur radio has always been
a rather specialized activity anyway.

No argument there.

I graduated high school in 1972 - the golden age of space
and technology, right?

Well, pretty close to the end of it....

In my high school of 2500 boys there were at most six licensed
hams. In the girls' school next door there were *none*. 5000
middle class kids in suburban Philly, going to schools where the
emphasis was on math and science, and there were but a handful of
hams. And this was in an era before CC&Rs, cable TV, VCRs, cell
phones, PCs, etc.

My basic thesis is that we as a society are moving toward the
celebration of the ordinary, the mundane. We have lost our
edge. And that can only last for so long.

I think it's the opposite - we don't celebrate the "ordinary"
enough!

Suppose - just suppose - that instead of going to the moon on
a "before this decade is out" timeline, the USA had devoted
some of those resources to developing energy
independence. Energy crisis? what energy crisis?

If we can celebrate those who *DO* things instead of simply
consume things, we might reverse that trend.

You mean "produce things". The people who are celebrities today
are all doers - movie stars, sports figures, etc.

The most popular highschool technical activity back
then was working on
cars. A kid with a few tools and skills could get
a few dollars
together, buy an old heap and get on the road.

Been there, done that. 8^)

How many highschoolers do that today?

73 de Jim, N2EY

You need to gain another 7 years in the saddle before you'll be 65
which is THE major milestone. After you hit that one you have not only
a free pass to having both feet in your mouth but it's also *expected*.
Geezerhood is a great, you'll enjoy it no end.

Takle care all 73 Tom KI3R Belle Vernon Pa.

w3rv

God willing Kelly ..God willing ....

73 Tom KI3R

wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:

.. . .

On the other hand, I believe that we should have a good
mix of ages.

Sure - but how much is enough? If, say, 10% of the US amateur
population were under the age of 21, would that be enough?

What "dire fate" would befall ham radio if there wasn't a single
licensee under 21? What do they actaully bring to hobby which is so
important?? Sorry, makes no sense, I just don't get it.

If it's a numbers game why not shift gears and recruit retirees instead
of chasing kids? The retirees are far more independent than kids,
they're more mature, on average they don't care about nonsense like
instant gratification and peer pressure and they have the time the kids
don't have. And in most cases they also have the money the kids don't
have.

w3rv

wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:

. . .

On the other hand, I believe that we should have a good
mix of ages.

Sure - but how much is enough? If, say, 10% of the US amateur
population were under the age of 21, would that be enough?

What "dire fate" would befall ham radio if there wasn't a single
licensee under 21? What do they actaully bring to hobby which is so
important?? Sorry, makes no sense, I just don't get it.

If it's a numbers game why not shift gears and recruit retirees instead
of chasing kids? The retirees are far more independent than kids,
they're more mature, on average they don't care about nonsense like
instant gratification and peer pressure and they have the time the kids
don't have. And in most cases they also have the money the kids don't
have.

w3rv


Kelly,

I think we're batting our gums over nothing. The original post, in my mind,
hit the nail on the head. Technical folks seem to be almost unwanted in the
United States. One reason for amateur radio (at least in the past) was to
attract the technically oriented and hopefully some would persue their
interest and become engineers.

Engineers don't make tons of money these days. Skilled trades folks are
almost unwanted. I had to laugh, there were ads for toolmakers (a number of
years minimum experience) that ran $10.00 to $12.00 per hour. I just saw an
ad for a parking lot attendent at $11.00 per hour. Of course, the
requirements for that job were tough. Almost as tough as amateur radio
requirements. Not only did you need a high school diploma (or ged, or
equivalent experience), you had to be able to make change without the use of
a computer or calculator!

Meanwhile, Russia launches Direct TVs latest hi-definition satellite, China
does the manufacturing.

As to your suggestion about putting a minimum age limit for amateurs,
raising it enough (say to 55) would ensure that mostly appliance operators
apply.

Sorry, I can't agree on an age limit for amateurs (although I understand
what you mean about the numbers game - therefor the suggestion). Meanwhile,
we have to get rid of manufacturing and perhaps teachers too. We have more
important stuff to deal with, such as the weapons of mass destruction.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

"Jim Hampton" wrote

We have more important stuff to deal with, such
as the weapons of mass destruction.

It's amazing how hard those suckers are to find! So far about 1,600 of our
youth have died looking for those pesky things.

Just when the military cemeteries were filling mostly with old retired warriors,
it looks like Memorial Day is getting a new lease on life.

dit dit

de Hans, K0HB

wrote in message
oups.com...
wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote:

. . .

On the other hand, I believe that we should have a good
mix of ages.

Sure - but how much is enough? If, say, 10% of the US amateur
population were under the age of 21, would that be enough?

What "dire fate" would befall ham radio if there wasn't a single
licensee under 21? What do they actaully bring to hobby which is so
important?? Sorry, makes no sense, I just don't get it.

If it's a numbers game why not shift gears and recruit retirees instead
of chasing kids? The retirees are far more independent than kids,
they're more mature, on average they don't care about nonsense like
instant gratification and peer pressure and they have the time the kids
don't have. And in most cases they also have the money the kids don't
have.

w3rv


I've often suggested recruiting people in the 40 to 50 year old range.
Their kids are grown or nearly so. They have a better income than when they
were younger and a little more free time than when they were younger. And
they are still young enough to have energy and enthusiasm for new
activities.

Personally I try to encourage everyone of all ages who shows even a hint of
interest.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE