The Unexotic Underclass

The limited expansion of health care is the main problem with the ACA, but a big part of that can be blamed on the Supreme Court.

"Very simple", applied to diet? Try very controversial.

There are tons of different "good diet" theories, and many of them are mutually contradictory.

I've tried several, and done a lot of research. I've settled on "low carb" as sustainable, healthy, and actually effective -- and it doesn't need to be terribly expensive (though it's likely more expensive than subsisting on grains).

But getting people to change their diet -- really change -- is really hard. For low carb, it means no possibility of fast food (except the occasional burger or grilled chicken patty sans bun -- no fries with that!), so you have to plan more carefully. And if you don't want to be eating all-meat, you have to cook low carb vegetables and eat salads.

When I tell people how I eat, they generally tell me they couldn't eat that way, and the reason is that they have their own food habits/rituals that involve carbs. And it typically ends there.

If there were more places that were low-carb-friendly, it would be much easier. But aside from the occasional BBQ joint that offers non-sweet sauces, it's really hard.

[By the way: when you say "sugar diets", are you including all simple carbs in that? Because eating cooked potatoes gives you a faster "sugar rush" than eating sugar; to really fight metabolic syndrome, you need to get rid of high glycemic index foods as well, and ideally just eliminate carbs entirely. Natural fats, on the other hand, are fine if you eliminate carbs. I refer to my diet as the "bacon and dark chocolate" diet, because I can pretty much eat as much of both as I feel like -- and yet I've lost more than 30 pounds.]

Some of what you are saying is applicable to Advertising as well. See Chris Dixon's posts on why Google is so profitable because its closest to the transaction.

http://cdixon.org/2010/02/19/a-massive-misallocation-of-onli...

http://cdixon.org/2009/09/29/why-content-sites-are-getting-r...

===From Chris Dixon's Posts===

For example, an average camera buyer takes 30 days and clicks on approximately 3 sponsored links from the beginning of researching cameras to actually purchasing one. Yet in most cases only the last click gets credit, by which I mean: 1) if it’s an affiliate (CPA) deal, it is literally usually the case that only the last affiliate (the site that drops the last cookie) gets paid, 2) if it’s a CPC or CPM deal, most advertisers don’t properly track the users across multiple site visits so simply attribute conversion to the most recent click, causing them to over-allocate to end-of-funnel links 3) if it’s a non-sponsored link (like Google natural search links) the advertiser might over-credit SEO when in fact the natural search click was just the final navigational step in a long process that involved sponsored links along the way.

What this means is there are two huge misallocations of advertising dollars online: the first from intent generators to intent harvesters; the second from intent harvesters that are at the beginning or middle of the purchasing process to those at the end of the purchasing process. This is not just a problem for internet advertisers and businesses – it affects all internet users. Where advertising dollars flow, money gets invested. It is well known that content sites are suffering, many are even on their way to dying. Additionally, product/service sites that started off focusing on research are forced to move more and more toward end-of-funnel activities.

>Many problems have an 80% software solution attached to a 20% "interface with the real world" mandatory bit.

My "Big Problem" is Education. I'd almost flip those numbers -- 20% software, 80% "interface with the real world." Throw in non-trivial entrenched interests including existing teachers who think they know the best way to teach, and a significant fraction of people in this country who went through a public school education and who might be prone to object to teaching kids in a new and different way.

But I still want to try. I think that it's a problem that will actually address many of the "unexotic big problems" plaguing the world today.

The big fix is for the poor. Get education right and you can make strides against poverty from multiple directions. The educated adults you produce will be more able to be employed, or to create employment opportunities (depending on temperament and opportunity). That would help single mothers and the rest -- eventually.