First Blog

An eternal impossible problem/situation of the conflict variety Suppose there is an ascending, aggressive appearing, nation emerging and building military might. Their threat is ominous though they assert no claims for territory are in their plans. The developments are only for defense. What is the response of the other nations? There are two. Type A. We should fortify this location or making alliances with nearby nations thereby hedging in this imminent threat, making clear our intent to delimit any strategies they may have, and demonstrating the severe cost to territorial ventures. Let us negotiate from strength. Type B. We should not fortify because it will anger and possibly even enhance their build-up making them more dangerous. It may even trigger a venture for territorial gain. Let us accept their word that they do not seek aggression with other nations. Let us negotiate from good will It is remarkable how consistent these strategies with variations have sustained over most

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." --- Shakespeare The legal profession has about the broadest range of intellectual ability as any of the prominent professions.  Known to most as an important profession, necessary in a complex society, but for which billed fees are perceived as disproportionate to the services rendered.  This we know.  However, it is the range of skill of lawyers, from supreme intellect to barely literate that we come upon.  It's all in the licensing. Many folks could handle simple wills, property closing, contract execution and enforcement, and numerous lawyerly skills. For most of these tasks there are strict procedures of practice. Very little actual legal knowledge is required. There is a difference between understanding the nature of the law and preparing a will or trust for some needful client.  To be sure, without licensing the doors would open to completely unscrupulous, incompetent, and immoral practitioners.  Licensin