ARRL Encouraging Amateurs to File Comments Opposing FCC Fee Proposal

It would be different if we were able to recoup the cost. I use my time and equipment to volunteer for the community at no expense to anyone.

 

I think what a lot of people are missing is that the fee is just plain excessive.

The only stated goal of the FCC is to recover the costs of processing the application. That's it. And the money doesn't go to the FCC or to improve ham radio, or to help us in any way. It goes to the government coffers.

I wouldn't mind paying a realistic application fee, based on the direct labor costs to process that application, like the NPRM says this fee is supposed to do. But that would be down in the $5 range, and no one (well, not many) would complain about that. But jacked up by a factor of ten is just ridiculous.

 

Here's Venice Beach, Los Angeles, last week. SRO with a tent city of mostly newly homeless.

According to you, its 'too bad for them'"


Here it is extending outside the nearby Whole Foods....

 

So, not being a well educated man, other departments within the radio communications band use and monitor frequencies used my ham operators, especially during disasters, are they going to be charged a fee as well ? And where is the $$$ supposed to go?

 

I volunteer at a food/clothes bank which I consider at least productive as I can clean out a lot of my and the families surplus I was amazed at what they could use.

 

Shall we base decisions affecting the hobby based on 3 people?
While unfortunate, if they ‘lost their homes’, it’s a moot point - they have bigger problems than ARRL membership.

 

Nice picture of a guy wearing Bose headset connected to his iPhone sitting outside his $400 tent. Your point?

 

My point is that I can well afford any fee the FCC charges. That doesn't mean I am lacking in empathy and support, for those in need, who may not be able to pay the application fees, and I have clearly and repeated expressed the need for exceptions to the present 'global fee'. My NPRM response will clearly indicate that.

Of course, if you had READ the existing NPRM responses, you would find many alluding to such hardship.

I think it is in extraordinarily bad taste to publicly question someone who expresses support for those who are seeing financial challenges in these trying times.

And, if you aren't aware of the TRYING TIMES, then stick your head out of your shell and open your eyes.

 

He spent the $400 once. That paltry sum isn't a fraction of the rent anywhere in that atea.

So he has an iPhone. You don't know if it's a gift, used, older model.

Your presupposed conclusion that street people shouldn't have things colors your perception and assumptions about what you think you are seeing. Be careful about that.

So, bigger issue is you don't want poor people to have anything. Why is that?

 

I guess the monthly fee for the phone is also a gift? I must admit I don't know any homeless folks and wonder how many hundreds or thousands of them are licensed ham radio operators?

 

Please spare the morality argument - it is nonsense in the context of hams enjoying a hobby in their/our spare time with sufficient disposable income to buy equipment.

You simply think the license should be free. Don’t disguise your motivation by using morality arguments with people about whom you have no clue.

 

I've heard that several hours standing at a traffic light with a cardboard sign, one can collect plenty of $$.

 

Absolutely not. I do not think the 'license should be free'. I never ever said that. I have never thought that. Nor led anyone to that conclusion.

Never ever.

It is morally vile for you to make such a false assertion, albeit consistent with your absolutely horrific aspersion on those who are in tough financial circumstances in these trying times.

Have you no SHAME?

 

I am aware of said individuals. Of course, the fact that they have to temporarily bunk-up with friends and relatives would doubtlessly be characterized by some here as 'homed'--because they aren't living in tents on the streets of LA.

 

Lets review - you wrote the attached quote and now you imply I am wrongly 'making aspersions" or that I'm the one who is judging. Are you serious?

"I think it is in extraordinarily bad taste to publicly question someone who expresses support for those who are seeing financial challenges in these trying times.... if you aren't aware of the TRYING TIMES, then stick your head out of your shell and open your eyes."

get a grip man!
Again, this has nothing to do with homeless people so please stop trying to twist and obfuscate. Trying those transparent tactics serves only to insult our intelligence.