Because no one reads this blog

Let me put forth a (non!)transparent problem in a way or two and evaluate it from a few angles.

Problem: my short term optimal solution is vastly different than my long term optimal solution. I don't know where the inflection point is, and so I don't know the relative weights I should use. The long term solution is costly to obtain while the short term solution is on hand.

Problem: I'm very unhappy when I'm alone right now. I know that in the future I will want very much to have someone to whom I give up a lot of my shallower freedoms to in order to have a good deal of security. I cannot be happy while giving up thoses freedoms right now as I've just gotten them. My solution is to try to get a small amount of security from someone who is not asking me to give up those freedoms. In the long term the small amount of security will be a big deal (how small it is).

Evaluation (math): it seems obvious that the cost to obtain the long term solution (not too high) will never outweigh the certainty that in the short term (up to the inflection point) the short term solution is vastly superior.

Evaluation (psychology): I'm destined for unhappiness and I can't choose when to have the unhappiness and in that inability to choose I'm gonig to be stuck with more of it later.

Evaluation (mean economics): change my incentives such that the short term solution is no longer optimal in any time frame.

Evaluation (political economics): create an institution that lowers the cost of the long term solution so that the transition is less painful. Shift the cost to someone more able to bear it.

Evaluation (internet): find a community of people in a similar situation and share life experiences to increase group happiness..