Hans K0HB wrote:
"Kim W5TIT" wrote


Were they as free as Hans seems to think they are, I really
wonder how valuable they would be.



I will try to end your wondering. First, I don't "seem to think"; for
my value system I "know". All of the things I mentioned are among the
things I value the very most in life. They come to me as free
unconditional gifts which no amount of 'investment' would earn. In
other words, their value is completely independent of their cost.

Without putting words in anyones mouth, it appears from the posts of
you, Jim and Dee, that your value system is based on 'investment gives
beneficial results'. In my value system, the 'results' are valued
solely on merit without regard to how I acquired them.

As a kind of crude example, the value of two $10.00 bills, one which I
found on the street and the other which I performed hard labor to earn
are exactly equal. What I 'invested' in either one is absolutely
immaterial when calculating their value --- the corner grocer will
take either one and give me precisely the same change when I purchase
a jar of olives.

Taking it back to the context of this thread, my amateur license or my
drivers license or my fishing license have value to me based on the
beneficial things I can do with them. The value is not related in any
fashion to the 'cost' or 'effort' that it took to obtain the license.

Good post, and good argument, Hans.

But I wonder if there is no place for pride of accomplishment? In my
other hobby, I spent several years making a large telescope. It was an
intense project, and took a lot of effort. In the end, I was rewarded
with a wonderful, beautiful, and very high quality instrument. It won
first place in the only competition I entered it in.

I'm very proud of it, and very proud of being able to accomplish such a
feat with my own hands. I would have no such thoughts about the purchase
of a commercial telescope of somewhat similar style. So something must
be going on there.



"I came to see your beautiful new baby, not to
listen to a description of your labor pains."

oy!

- Mike KB3EIA -

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"Brian" wrote in message
. com...

Furthermore, if the US government wants to give all prospective
amateurs 3 hots and a cot, and a paycheck, for the duration it takes
to learn the code, I'd gladly enroll in the CG Morse Code school.

There's one problem ... there IS no CG Morse Code school any
more ...

Sad but true.

the services are NOT teaching their radiomen Morse any
more.

Even if they were - would it make any difference to your opinion of the
need
for code testing in the amateur radio service?

It would add *some* potential validity to the "trained (in Morse) pool of
operators" part of 97.1 ... however, that is not the case and hasn't been
for some time ...

It wouldn't be a "slam-dunk" in favor of continued Morse testing for
HF ham licenses though.

73,
Carl - wk3c

"Hans K0HB" wrote in message
m...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote


Were they as free as Hans seems to think they are, I really
wonder how valuable they would be.


I will try to end your wondering. First, I don't "seem to think"; for
my value system I "know". All of the things I mentioned are among the
things I value the very most in life. They come to me as free
unconditional gifts which no amount of 'investment' would earn. In
other words, their value is completely independent of their cost.

Without putting words in anyones mouth, it appears from the posts of
you, Jim and Dee, that your value system is based on 'investment gives
beneficial results'. In my value system, the 'results' are valued
solely on merit without regard to how I acquired them.

As a kind of crude example, the value of two $10.00 bills, one which I
found on the street and the other which I performed hard labor to earn
are exactly equal. What I 'invested' in either one is absolutely
immaterial when calculating their value --- the corner grocer will
take either one and give me precisely the same change when I purchase
a jar of olives.

Taking it back to the context of this thread, my amateur license or my
drivers license or my fishing license have value to me based on the
beneficial things I can do with them. The value is not related in any
fashion to the 'cost' or 'effort' that it took to obtain the license.

73, de Hans, K0HB

I agree with Hans 100%+ on this one ... the value is in what they let
you do, not what you had to do to get them.

Carl - wk3c

In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

snip

It is a fact of human nature that most people value a thing more if it
took some investment of themselves to acquire.

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think this is precisely why some people argue so vociferously for code
tesing despite the lack of any logical arguments for retaining it. That is
to say, they value it because it's hard instead of because it's necessary
(which it isn't!!!).

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Alun, it boils down to the obvious reason: They had to learn morse
code so everyone else better damn well have to learn it!!!

:-)

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
(Hans K0HB) wrote in message
. com...
"N2EY" wrote


1) Back in '78, the students learned Morse Code as part of their CG
training,
so there was no other training needed for them to get Extra Class
amateur
licenses. Today, they would need to put in some of their own time,
and
a bit of
effort, learning Morse at 5 wpm for that test.


You know Jim, the more I ponder this paragraph, the more I think you
may just have hit on an important way of grading the dedication (and
therefore "value") of any given amateur licensee.

Well, that wasn't my intent at all. I was merely pointing out that for
some folks, getting a license involves a lot of learning and the
related effort, while others already have the skills and knowledge.

The point is that licensing should be based on one's demonstration
of the required qualifications, no more, no less.

That's your point, Carl, not my point.

OK, we'll put you down for "not demonstrating qualifications."

The original story told how, back in 1978, the whole class of CG folks
went down to FCC and became Extras, while today none of them did.

1978 was 25 years ago. This isn't 1978.

In 25 years, a child could be conceived, raised, educated, and become
a working adult on their own.

Things are NOT static in time just because they are (apparently) fresh
in your mind.

My point was simply that there are significant differences between the
1978 and 2003 situations, such as:

- the 1978 class was 'required' to take the test, and means provided
to do so (do you think they went on their own time? used their own
transportation? paid any fees?).

- the 1978 class had already learned all they needed to know to pass
the 1978 tests.

Which means WHAT?

Members of ANY branch of the US military in 1978 were ALL
volunteers. ALL.

If someone already has the knowledge to pass the tests, fine.

You can't change that situation anyway.

Is this to be entirely about the PAST...again?

You cannot undo history. That has already happened...that's why it is
called history.

You can NOT use the PAST as a valid argument to have any knowledge,
skills, arts, or crafts preserved for the present and future with any
validity.

There is no "value added" in "making them work for it"

Who said there was? The point is that the 1978 class had a completely
different situation from the 2003 class.

You are slowly beginning to see reality. Congratulations.

... if
they have the knowledge they are qualified, period.

So would you agree with Kim that anyone who can pass the required
tests should be allowed into the ARS?

Are you talking about the USCG or US amateur radio?

You are confusing, hopping around on subjects...

The ONLY agency awarding grants (in the form of licenses) for operating
on allocated amateur radio frequencies is the FCC. The USCG has
nothing to do with it.

(and likely
they worked for it or they wouldn't have the knowledge anyway,
so the logic of "making them work (more)" fails)

It is a fact of human nature that most people value a thing more if it
took some investment of themselves to acquire.

Which leads everyone to the implied reason of all PCTAs arguing for
the retention of code testing: They had to do it so everyone else had
better damn well do it, too!!!

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

snip

It is a fact of human nature that most people value a thing more if it
took some investment of themselves to acquire.

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think this is precisely why some people argue so vociferously for code
tesing despite the lack of any logical arguments for retaining it.

There are lots of logical arguments for retaining code testing.

Not as a point of federal law, I think. The biggest proponents on
raap have rolled over as far as the facts are concerned, and that should be
enough for anyboy.



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.520 / Virus Database: 318 - Release Date: 9/18/2003

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...
In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

snip

It is a fact of human nature that most people value a thing more if it
took some investment of themselves to acquire.

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think this is precisely why some people argue so vociferously for code
tesing despite the lack of any logical arguments for retaining it. That
is
to say, they value it because it's hard instead of because it's necessary
(which it isn't!!!).

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Alun, it boils down to the obvious reason: They had to learn morse
code so everyone else better damn well have to learn it!!!

Point given by Roll et. al., eh?




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.520 / Virus Database: 318 - Release Date: 9/18/2003

"Hans K0HB" wrote in message
om...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote


Why does it have to be your way or no way, Hans?


Did I say "my way or no way"?????

Jim is free to have a different opinion, and I am free to suggest his
opinion is inconsistent with reality.


My amateur license cost me virtually nothing in terms of 'investment
of myself', and the curbs and gutters the city just installed at one
of my places cost me an $8,200 assessment. I value my amateur license
a LOT more than I value the city's new street curbing!

The things that I value the very most quite honestly are literal gifts
which I have recieved without an ounce of 'investment' or 'cost' ---
the love of my wife, the smiles of my grandkids, the whisper of the
wind at sunset on Lake Vermilion, the conversation with an old friend,
or my healthy heart. I value all of these more than my homes, my RV,
my boat, or the QSL collection in the closet.

With all kind wishes,

de Hans, K0HB

The only one of those, above, that is a literal gift is the wind at
sunset
on Lake Vermilion. The rest cost you plenty.

You're mistaken. They are absolute unconditional gifts, and I
treasure them all the more for the fact that no amount of effort of
mine could have 'earned' them.

73, de Hans, K0HB
--
"Reality doesn't care what you believe." -- K0HB

Your wife's love for example may have been given unconditionally but you
have to work to keep it by giving love in return. That is an investment of
self. If you do not love in return, a spouse's love dies. It needs
nourished with love to survive.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...


- the 1978 class had already learned all they needed to know to pass
the 1978 tests.

Which means WHAT?

Members of ANY branch of the US military in 1978 were ALL
volunteers. ALL.


Yeah, they volunteered to join which is to say they agreed to swear to
follow the orders of their superiors. What do you surmise would have
happened to one of those CG grunts if he told his lieutenant "Oh well
screw you George, I'm a volunteer and I ain't taking no damned ham
radio tests."

Ya goofy PUTZ.

"Hans K0HB" wrote in message
om...
"Kim W5TIT" wrote


Why does it have to be your way or no way, Hans?


Did I say "my way or no way"?????

Jim is free to have a different opinion, and I am free to suggest his
opinion is inconsistent with reality.


Seems like it would be a bit more acceptable if you agreed to the concept of
using the term reality with respect to "your" perspective. Your reality may
not be the same as everyone or anyone else's.

Kim W5TIT