RFI
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RFI] FW: Sweden imposes higher levy on electricity bills for EMC |

To: Joe <w7rkn.7@gmail.com>, RFI@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RFI] FW: Sweden imposes higher levy on electricity bills for EMC | Southgate Amateur Radio News
From: Dave <dave@nk7z.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2021 08:22:15 -0800
List-post: <mailto:rfi@contesting.com>
Hi Joe,

Again, respectfully, you keep moving the question from would I pay $600.00 a year to have a clean RF environment, to something other than a clean RF environment for my paying a fee... These are entirely different questions. So for now, lets agree to a different set of questions...

Let me answer your new question:

All of us are already paying a fee, (via taxes), for enforcement of the EMI suppression laws, and yet here we are with EMI problems!

We are here because that process has clearly failed us. So why would I pay an additional fee for a failed process?

Thus my answer is no, I am not willing to pay an increased fee for a failed process. However, (as per my original answer to the original question), I am willing to pay a reasonable fee for a successful process.

As you said:

On 12/30/21 16:43, Joe wrote:
>But you (and I) are but .001%, or less, of the population. I really >doubt many non-hams would welcome another needless (to them) 'tax' >added to what they are burdened with already!

The above seem to be in conflict with what you suggested originally, to threaten officials with removal by election.

As I said initially, we can not threaten elected officials with a vote to remove, over EMI issues, for precisely the reason I stated originally, and you have now agreed with.

That said, the real question here is how do we solve the current EMI problem with solutions that will actually work, in the current environment?

I think the ARRL is on the right track... Start by setting boundaries, via current methods...

While this is a very slow process, it is one that I believe in the long run will help.

Will it fix the issue of EMI, not a chance, but it will make it better... But only when people in general are effected by EMI.

On 12/30/21 16:43, Joe wrote:
But you (and I) are but .001%, or less, of the population.  I really doubt
many non-hams would welcome another needless (to them) 'tax' added to what
they are burdened with already!

How about any radio frequency licensee paying an additional fee for RFI
surpression?  Would you (we) be open to that?

Joe - W7RKN

-----Original Message-----
From: RFI [mailto:rfi-bounces+w7rkn.7=gmail.com@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
Dave
Subject: Re: [RFI] FW: Sweden imposes higher levy on electricity bills for
EMC | Southgate Amateur Radio News

Joe,

Am I willing to pay more for a clean RF environment, yes!  I would
happily pay $600/year for a clean RF spectrum.


73,
Dave,
https://www.nk7z.net

_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>