> If you think the right choices are more at the extremes

There are plenty of questions where the correct answer is extreme. Ironically, you're making a categorical claim that doesn't hold up.

The ideal amount of violent crime is none at all. The ideal amount of deceptive advertising is none at all. The ideal amount of slavery is none at all, despite that there was a time this idea was considered extreme. The ideal amount of sexism is none at all, even if some regressive people today, and virtually everyone historically, would contest this. The list continues.

It's not enough to accuse someone's opinion of being extreme. That's not an argument, it's just expressing a preference for the status quo. Plenty of extreme opinions are perfectly reasonable. Sometimes it can even be abhorrent not to hold an extreme opinion.

> Heaven help you if you ever start a family.

Don't do this on Hacker News.

I'll give a concrete example. Health care systems. Free market works okay. Socialized (a la Britain) works okay. The middle -- where the US is, with a mixture of free market and regulation -- is prone to corruption and works less well than either extreme.

Killing, stealing, rape, and murder are bad. I'm going to go to the far extreme there too.

If I'm running a business, focusing on one thing and doing it well (and outsourcing everything else, or following "industry practices") works better than trying to innovate everywhere. That's actually pretty general -- if you're extremely good at a few things, that works better than balance on a personal career level too.

It's a fallacy to split down the middle and balance. There are times that works, and times that doesn't.

Life ain't about balance. It's about thinking things through.