The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
I think it's great that telemarketers can no longer cause people distress through harrassment -- unless they want to pay a fine by calling a protected phone number through the "don't call" program.
A lot of Republicans are not racist, but a lot of racists are Republican.
Yep... Congress says this is the law, then the adminstrative departments creates regulations in order for the enforcement of the law.
There is no reason for an exective branch if it cannot create regulations for executing the law passed by the legislature.
Why would the executive branch need to "create regulations" to enforce a law passed by Congress? The Constitution is clear, the executive branch enforces the laws and the Congress writes them...not bureaucrats empowered to write regulations. Why can't you guys show me where in the Constitution you found a bureaucratic power to write laws?
There is no law in any state, that I am aware of, that allows a cop to write a traffic ticket. Does that mean he can't because if he does so he is 'writing law'?
You aren't aware? If there is no law against running a stop sign and a cop tickets you and the court upholds the ticket, then both "wrote a law".
MtG -
Let's see, it's the "Direct Marketing Association" calling people to get them to buy stuff. Sounds like Interstate Commerce Clause to me, except undoubtedly commerce means something special and uniqute in the Liberterarium, distinct from it's meaning in the world at large.
Do you notice a difference between commerce and interstate commerce? What if the company calling you is in your state? The ICC was designed to give Congress the power to create a free trade zone among the states because under the AoC some of the states entered into trade wars. It was not meant to be a congressional power to shut down trade among the states. Btw, since when is asking you to buy a product "commerce" much less interstate commerce? Commerce is the exchange, not the notification that a product is for sale.
sky -
Their regulations have the force of the law that says "obey the regulations they write". DUH. They are not writing a law; they are obeying it.
Did Congress write the regulation or did the bureaucracy? Stop banging your head against a wall and think about that a minute.
Why would the executive branch need to "create regulations" to enforce a law passed by Congress?
Because you have to in order to enforce laws. Enforcement requires regulations by those in executive power, or else you have nice laws that don't mean anything because they aren't properly enforced. How else do you enforce a law saying something like 'Factories are fined if they release an unhealthy amount of pollutants'? You have to create a regulation defining how much release of pollutants is 'unhealthy', so you know who to go after. Or in Title VII cases, the EEOC has to define what constitutes 'disparate impact', so they know which employers to go after.
If there is no law against running a stop sign and a cop tickets you and the court upholds the ticket, then both "wrote a law".
But there is a law against running a stop sign. There is no law saying a cop can write a ticket. The cop doesn't write law when he issues a ticket. He enforces the law against running stop signs.
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
Because you have to in order to enforce laws. Enforcement requires regulations by those in executive power, or else you have nice laws that don't mean anything because they aren't properly enforced. How else do you enforce a law saying something like 'Factories are fined if they release an unhealthy amount of pollutants'? You have to create a regulation defining how much release of pollutants is 'unhealthy', so you know who to go after. Or in Title VII cases, the EEOC has to define what constitutes 'disparate impact', so they know which employers to go after.
Congress writes a law allowing a certain amount of pollution and the fine for violating the law. The bureaucrats don't need any regulations to enforce that law, they just enforce the law as it is written. But that's not what happens under the "modern" Constitution. Congress tells bureaucrats to, e.g., reduce food poisoning and then leaves it up to them to write and enforce the regulations. That's like, to expand upon sky's analogy, a state legislature telling a cop to reduce traffic accidents and leaving it up to him to write the traffic laws. Now, the legislature(s) do get into more detail than that, but they still leave most of the details up to the bureaucrats. The reason we see this practice is because as Congress has expanded it's power far beyond it's constitutional limits and created all those bureaucracies to deal with these new powers, there are just too many regulations for Congress to write. We literally have millions of laws in this country with God only knows how many new ones added every year...
But there is a law against running a stop sign. There is no law saying a cop can write a ticket. The cop doesn't write law when he issues a ticket. He enforces the law against running stop signs.
Where did you get the idea there is no law authorising cops to issue tickets?
Tweet
Comment