440 Band in Jeopardy

This forum is for technical questions, advice, and general communications discussions, including alternative communications devices such as CB, GMRS and FRS.
User avatar
DaveK
Site Admin
Posts: 3543
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:33 am
Call Sign: K6DTK
Location: Southern California

440 Band in Jeopardy

#1

Post by DaveK » Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:44 am

Legislation has been introduced that could remove the 440 band from the Amateur frequencies. Check the link to the ARRL page for info: http://www.arrl.org/news/spectrum-manag ... requencies.

Time to dust off the pen and paper and write to your representative urging a no vote.
DaveK
K6DTK


Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

User avatar
OLLIE
Posts: 2693
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 7:31 am
Call Sign: K6JYB
Location: Sweet Home Alabama!!!

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#2

Post by OLLIE » Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:51 am

That sucks. The government just can't keep their hands off of anything. :(
"OLLIE"
(K6JYB)


APRS
K6JYB ("BugEater")
K6JYB-7 (VX-8R)


http://www.facebook.com/FJOllie

"Some people live an entire lifetime and wonder if they have ever made a difference in the world, the Marines don't have that problem."
-Ronald Reagan


CHECK OUT THE OUTDOOR ADVENTURE USA AMATEUR RADIO NET:
Every Thursday night at 7:30pm PST

Repeater
146.385+ PL: 146.2 Keller Peak (Echolink Equipped)

User avatar
cruiserlarry
OAUSA Board Member
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:23 pm
Call Sign: W6LPB
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#3

Post by cruiserlarry » Wed Feb 23, 2011 11:54 am

Well, let's not blame the entire government yet... :roll:

It seems one congressman has thought it profitable to sell off those frequencies to the private sector, as opposed to leaving them in the hands of the goverment control for use by private citizens for the public good....not unlike the general idea of removing goverment control from everything and returning it to the private sector. He's just following the lead of many of his cronies in the house and Senate, IMHO. Just as this would be a disaster for most government run programs, despite all the hype to the opposite, so it would be for amateur radio...Private profit for a few large telecommunications companies, at the expense of the public good for the many - just business as usual...

At least the HR 607 provides for a 10-year lead time, giving us all plenty of time to sell our 440 radios :o :lol:
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear really bright, until they start talking

W6LPB / WPOK492

Become a DIRTY PARTS FACEBOOK fan !!!

User avatar
DaveK
Site Admin
Posts: 3543
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:33 am
Call Sign: K6DTK
Location: Southern California

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#4

Post by DaveK » Wed Feb 23, 2011 3:13 pm

Larry:


You never miss an opportunity to take a swipe. I guess I knew that you couldn't resist.

I think your are in error that Congressman King, or anyone, wants to "remove government control and return EVERYTHING over to the private sector".

Congressman Kings Legislation (HR 607) is wrong and that should be a position taken by anyone who has a reasonable understanding of the value of Ham Radio, regardless of their political party.

I take it by your description of "Congressman King and his cronies", that you are referring to the overwhelming majority of new members that were swept into the House in the last election. While I disagree with King's legislation, I would much rather have this group of cronies who are trying to make money than the previous group of cronies that were giving away trillions of dollars, (most of which we did not have and all of which has contributed to an unsustainable national debt).

Perhaps we should just agree that this particular piece of legislation is wrong and leave it at that! And besides, I have no intention of giving up my 440 radio.
DaveK
K6DTK


Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

User avatar
cruiserlarry
OAUSA Board Member
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:23 pm
Call Sign: W6LPB
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#5

Post by cruiserlarry » Wed Feb 23, 2011 8:09 pm

DaveK wrote:Larry:


You never miss an opportunity to take a swipe. I guess I knew that you couldn't resist.

I think your are in error that Congressman King, or anyone, wants to "remove government control and return EVERYTHING over to the private sector".

Congressman Kings Legislation (HR 607) is wrong and that should be a position taken by anyone who has a reasonable understanding of the value of Ham Radio, regardless of their political party.

I take it by your description of "Congressman King and his cronies", that you are referring to the overwhelming majority of new members that were swept into the House in the last election. While I disagree with King's legislation, I would much rather have this group of cronies who are trying to make money than the previous group of cronies that were giving away trillions of dollars, (most of which we did not have and all of which has contributed to an unsustainable national debt).

Perhaps we should just agree that this particular piece of legislation is wrong and leave it at that! And besides, I have no intention of giving up my 440 radio.
First, it was not a swipe, it is a fact. I did not specify a political party, or even the congressman himself, so my "swipe" was generic in nature - but I knew it would wake you up, regardless... :mrgreen:

Regarding his "cronies", again, I was nondescript. I have a distaste for most of congress, regardless of party, based on the strict party nature of all politics at this time. Nothing is getting done, because there is an all or nothing mentality that has become pervasive in all aspects of American society at this juncture in time. While I do not think the new members are going to be of benefit to the majority of Americans, I have no praise for those they replaced, either. Personally, I'd throw them all out and start from scratch... :lol:

f you do your research, you will find that the two most generous administrations with your dollars, and mine, were under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Regardless of how statistics are skewed, they spent the most. However, it's not about party, it's about bad government to me. It is not the fact that we spend trillions - it's where it is spent and why, that is of larger concern to me. To be clear, the issue of debt has been used to scare people for the last 4 decades - yet we roll on. Most folks don't understand the application or need for debt, but all governments, corporations, and large financial entities not only have debt, but require it for proper functioning. Panic is what caused many to be elected, and their lack of knowledge and expertise will cause the continuation of bad policy creation, including HR 607.

We are in complete agreement that this legislation is wrong - but I find it wrong in a pattern that certain politicians are fond of attaching their loyalties to - smaller government, and the distribution of government responsibilities to the private sector. This is also well documented. The reason I made my comment was not to taint this issue with party politics, but rather to try to raise awareness of the results of blindly following bad policy idea that is touted by many old and new in Congress and the Senate to be beneficial to the public. It just isn't so, and even in this small example it becomes obvious IMO....

To paraphrase one of your heroes, "They'll have to pry my 440 radio from my dead hands".... :lol: :lol: :lol:
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear really bright, until they start talking

W6LPB / WPOK492

Become a DIRTY PARTS FACEBOOK fan !!!

User avatar
DaveK
Site Admin
Posts: 3543
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:33 am
Call Sign: K6DTK
Location: Southern California

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#6

Post by DaveK » Thu Feb 24, 2011 7:58 pm

Larry:

You’ve been doing it for so long, you have lost the ability to acknowledge a swipe, even when you are the author.

So anyway, let me see if I have this right. Massive, record-breaking deficit spending is OK because Bush and Reagan did it. That’s some very impressive hope and change ya’ got there.

Just for the record, here are the FACTS about who holds the title:

-Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase
-Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase
- George H.W. Bush’s Term – $1.587 trillion increase
-Bill Clinton’s First Term – $1.122 trillion increase
- Bill Clinton’s Second Term – $418 billion increase
- George W. Bush’s First Term – $1.885 trillion increase
- George W. Bush’s Second Term – $3.014 trillion increase
- Barack Obama’s FIRST “YEAR” – $1.573 trillion increase

Mr. Obama, in his first year alone, has set new records for spending and increases in the national debt. Current Obama administration projections indicate that the National Debt will increase by approximately $6.5 trillion during President Obama’s first term, thereby making him the winner in the National debt crisis. While Mr. Obama can claim the crown, we have had some significant contributions from his predecessors, none of whom were pikers. ALL unacceptable and unsustainable. While some debt may have advantages, we passed that point long ago.

So, as hard as it is for us sometimes to stay on topic, let me try to do so. My comment that started this was an observation that, while I did not agree with Congressman Kings proposed legislation, I would rather have him and his “cronies”, who are trying to make money, as opposed to the previous set of “cronies”, most of whom couldn’t stop spending OPM..

Presumably, in response to my comment, you asserted that we are not getting much done in Washington, I assume, due to these "cronies" that you dislike. Actually, this is partly true and the reason appears to be that we finally have some representatives who are willing to stand up and not compromise their core values. For that, I am both surprised and pleased. I know that you adhere to the belief that the only way that we can move ahead is by compromise, but many have had enough of this gradual erosion of our values and our country. Time will tell, but enough of these people managed to get elected last year and if they hold true to their promises, we can put a stop to this erosion or at least slow it down.

Your disdain for politicians who favor smaller government and privatization of government responsibilities is unfortunate but not uncommon among the left, or as you prefer to be called, progressives. Arguing with you would be futile. I can only observe that last November, a powerful big government majority was voted out of Congress in favor of another majority who, incidentally, are largely proponents of small government and privatization of many government functions. I fear that you are mistaken if you are expecting this new majority to be perfect. They will make some mistakes and the proposed King legislation is a good example. One misguided piece of proposed legislation does not make the whole idea of smaller government or privatization a bad idea. It simply means that this one idea was bad. To be honest, you did not need to take a swipe at the smaller government/privatization crowd in order to make the point that the King idea was bad. And yes, you did take a swipe and it was politically motivated.
DaveK
K6DTK


Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

User avatar
cruiserlarry
OAUSA Board Member
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:23 pm
Call Sign: W6LPB
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#7

Post by cruiserlarry » Thu Feb 24, 2011 11:50 pm

I'm not sure where your numbers are referenced from, but they do not take inflation into account.

The debt incurred during Obama's first year was generated by the previous administrations unrelenting defense spending trying to maintain two wars. Obama inherited this, and hasn't done much to reign it in, I would agree. But he did not create it by any means.

The current group of legislatures that were elected was do to a wave of fear-mongering that was very successful. Congrats to the winners. I'm not expecting perfection - far from it. We'll see in another 6 years or so, but I'd guess the destruction of the US economy and middle class has only just begun - and it will be exacerbated by the stonewalling techniques that you attribute to "core values", and I attribute to successful lobbying. Again, we'll see, but it will affect us both, regardless.

As for your appreciation of legislatures looking to make money, I'm all for it - if they are making money for the citizens they represent. Unfortunately, as with most of the government auctions for bandwidth, land, and anything else, it is not the government that usually reaps the profit; it is private corporations, who negotiate ridiculous prices in exchange for favors. This has been the case for years with other parts of the spectrum, and no doubt will affect any new allocations the FCC decides to give away. And it is not party-specific.

Reducing excess government is different than small government. It is government corruption that is the problem, not the size of the government itself. Fact is, given this size and population of this country, most government agencies, at every level, are severely understaffed and underfunded, and that is why they don't work. There is a lot of waste, to be sure. Rotating the party leadership hasn't done anything to eliminate waste or corruption, as your incomplete statistics show.

Back to the topic, HR 607 is bad legislation. It comes about when legislators, who have little knowledge of the issues they are dealing with, are influenced by those with a large profit motive and deep pockets.

And there is a big difference between a swipe and an explanation. I provided an explanation, and those who disagree read a swipe. Business as usual there, too. ;)

I'd suggest a visible 440 display at Bass Pro Shops, and maybe even have flyers available explaining the bill and why we are in agreement that it is a bad idea.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear really bright, until they start talking

W6LPB / WPOK492

Become a DIRTY PARTS FACEBOOK fan !!!

User avatar
DaveK
Site Admin
Posts: 3543
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2008 10:33 am
Call Sign: K6DTK
Location: Southern California

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#8

Post by DaveK » Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:33 pm

I see. If we inflation adjust the numbers, would Mr. Obama have to yield the title?

So, the debt incurred in the first year of Mr. Obama’s administration is the result of relentless defense spending, eh? Curious! Was the TARP money, the stimulus money, the mortgage bailout, the Wall Street bailout, the automobile bailouts, the AIG bailout, the Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac bailout, the endless extension of unemployment benefits, and all the other government give-aways, a part of this "unrelenting defense spending" as well? No Larry, Mr. Obama earned the title fair and square.

Oh, and by the way, I thought that Mr. Obama promised in his election campaign to complete the pullout of all troops in IRAQ by March of 2008. In case you hadn’t noticed, we're still there. Apparently he changed his mind. I guess that was Bush's fault too!

Ah yes, we next visit the "fear mongering" theory again. As I recall it goes something like this: the well intentioned, but gullible, American public was duped by the clever and evil right wing into voting for a new majority. Seems to me that I have heard this theory before. Due mostly to your fear of wearing the elitist label again, you didn't say what I suspect was really on your mind. Namely, we were just a bunch of dummies who got fooled by clever fear mongering. Larry, I get really tired of this crap. Suggesting that the people who voted their conscience or their values were so gullible or dumb that they couldn't see the truth, is just insulting. (This, of course, was just another swipe by you.)

Oddly, although it was unintended, you may have hit upon something here with this fear mongering thing. When you look back at the election, I think you will find that people were actually very fearful when they cast their votes - fearful of uncontrolled government spending, big government, exploding national debt, high taxes, big government, unresponsive representatives, massive government programs, a health care bill that most Americans didn't want, high unemployment, big government, government waste, a constant assault on American values, a dishonest and clueless media who, for the most part, refuse to report the news, an alarming refusal to enforce our borders, and of course, big government. I guess, for once, we are in agreement!

Your concern that corporations will make a profit is perhaps the most revealing part of your post. Why would anyone be opposed to a corporation making a profit? This is a perfect example of why the last election went in the direction that it did. If your concern is corruption, then we are in agreement that it should be corrected. If you are opposed to corporations making a profit, then we must part company. By the way, isn't Dirty Parts a "CORPORATION"?

Lastly, while debate here is truly futile, I note that the new majority in the House does not share your belief that the current size of government is not a problem. Thankfully, we have a huge number of new representatives who "say" that it is too big, too bloated, too expensive, and needs to be reduced. We will see what happens in the next several years.

Back to HR 607. I made this offer in the beginning and it seems appropriate to do so again. Since we appear to be entertaining only the two of us, why not just agree that the proposal is bad and avoid the swipes.
DaveK
K6DTK


Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.
Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

User avatar
xtatik
Posts: 295
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:58 pm
Call Sign: K6ARW

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#9

Post by xtatik » Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:37 pm

DaveK wrote:So, the debt incurred in the first year of Mr. Obama’s administration is the result of relentless defense spending, eh? Curious! Was the TARP money, the stimulus money, the mortgage bailout, the Wall Street bailout, the automobile bailouts, the AIG bailout, the Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac bailout, the endless extension of unemployment benefits, and all the other government give-aways, a part of this "unrelenting defense spending" as well? No Larry, Mr. Obama earned the title fair and square.
Really?.....Dave, is this really your reality? Cuz if it is, you need to brush up on recent history.
This is about as maligned as anything I've read on the subject.
I seem to remember all of the firms you've mentioned above portending doom as early as late 2007. I remember Bush sitting on his thumb until late 2008 before acknowledgment of the problem. It wasn't until an act of intervention by Paulson, Geithner, Bernanke and others forced him into acknowledging that his administrations weak management of the SEC (who BTW, were literally partying with rather than overseeing the mucky-mucks in the firms you've mentioned....real chummy!) and activities on "the Street".
I remember in September of 2008 watching Bush while he was giving his famous "deer in the headlights" speech to the nation and having to very somberly announce that we were on the cusp of a global financial meltdown. I remember Bush and Paulson budgeting a $700 billion dollar financial rescue fund which has since been universally accepted as inadequate by most analysts given the situation at the time.
As Bush's term in office came to an end, he and Paulson prescribed the means of a plan that was supposed to stop the hemorrhage and begin repair. The plan involved bailouts and in October of 2008 Bush signed the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_ ... ct_of_2008

This gave birth to the TARP Fund and immediately began the bailouts. However you view it, from right or left, because of this prescription or Act, Bush and Obama are tethered. Many policies Bush and Paulson put in place remained for Obama to manage and modify. Obama's own efforts to revive the economy will affect how deep the ongoing recession becomes – which in turn will color Bush's reputation as well as Obama's own.

But it's clear the crisis has led to some outcomes Bush hadn't planned on:

•A president who championed businesses interests, after witnessing some years of record corporate profits, left office with the very survival of some large firms at stake.

•A salesman for the "ownership society," who presided over record levels of homeownership, left office with the homeownership rate headed in reverse, due to mounting foreclosures. Family net worth is falling along with home values.

•Bush's legacy is what triggered a tightening of financial regulation....in light of what had transpired, this was good and necessary. As the recession deepened, as prescribed, government's role in the economy was expected to ramp up in many other ways, including what will possibly be a record stimulus measure.

•A great tax cutter leaves record budget deficits, making it hard for future presidents (plural) to keep taxes so low.

Also keep in mind, Obama has earned no title or "crown" to this point. If Obama exceeds Bush's second term number by the end of his term...then we'll know. To date he hasn't, so let's keep it real.
Randy
K6ARW

User avatar
cruiserlarry
OAUSA Board Member
Posts: 2801
Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:23 pm
Call Sign: W6LPB
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Contact:

Re: 440 Band in Jeopardy

#10

Post by cruiserlarry » Sat Feb 26, 2011 3:45 pm

DaveK wrote: Suggesting that the people who voted their conscience or their values were so gullible or dumb that they couldn't see the truth, is just insulting. (This, of course, was just another swipe by you.)

Your concern that corporations will make a profit is perhaps the most revealing part of your post. Why would anyone be opposed to a corporation making a profit?

Back to HR 607. I made this offer in the beginning and it seems appropriate to do so again. Since we appear to be entertaining only the two of us, why not just agree that the proposal is bad and avoid the swipes.
First, my appreciation to Randy for putting some effort into presenting some missing facts on the issue.

Dave, if you sincerely believe most people vote their conscience based on personal conviction, then you have spent much time in a closed room. While we both agree that would be wonderful, the reality is marketing works; and candidates are marketed to the public with strategies involving exaggeration, deceit, fear-mongering, and fraud - on all sides. At the risk of re-acquiring your elitist label, I would venture to say only the most actively involved, intellectually aware voters, regardless of party, are able to vote their conviction based on factual information. It certainly is not presented to the general public, and few among us are willing to take the time and energy required to get to the facts behind the hype. Many candidates are elected into office by misleading voters of "conscience" by withholding or distorting facts. Marketing to a person's fears and desires is much easier than presenting facts, and far, far more successful. (Hence the success, and size, of many of the corporations involved in these dealings). This unfortunate situation will continue, IMO, until the majority of voters take their responsibility seriously enough to dedicate time into vetting the candidates presented them on their own, not fall prey to the marketing campaigns they are bombarded with to tug on their "conscience" and "convictions"...

I have never begrudged any corporation or business the right to make a profit - so, again, you have twisted the meaning of my statement to fit your "convictions". I was stating that many of those involving in our government's negotiations have close ties to those interested institutions, giving away public property without just compensation for the American taxpayer, and allowing these very eager corps a chance to acquire valuable commodities for far less than market value. This has nothing to do with earning a profit honestly.

To return to the primary topic (without expanding into reasons behind the proposed legislation, which you fondly call "swipes" ) :

HR 607 is a bad piece of legislation, regardless of political viewpoint - and should be stopped.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear really bright, until they start talking

W6LPB / WPOK492

Become a DIRTY PARTS FACEBOOK fan !!!

Post Reply

Return to “COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL DISCUSSION”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest