[FuNe]

It's difficult to propose a neutral-all-win solution when what is perceived as a problem is actually advantageous to certain groups of people. E.g. how can you find such a solution to the troubles brought upon most of West States finances when they decided to finance the failed banks with tax payers' money. Similar situation with climate change, arms commerce, etc.

Also, proposing solutions, is a step you take after a critical percentage of public understanding has grasped the problem as such in the first place. Being there is highly disputed - see the part with what dominates the current electoral debates.

[erikpukinskis]

Why does it need to be an all-win? I think a maintain-current-levels-of-arable-land-and-minimize-genocide solution is intrinsically good. Sure, some in the oil and defense industries won't like it, but there are always losers. We don't need to kill them, so in that sense they're doing quite a lot better than losers in previous cultural shifts.