Tradeoffs are the start of a problem, not its conclusion. The stupidity of neoclassical economics can be summarized in that it considers a certain number of tradeoffs (efficiency vs equality, growth vs stability) as the end of the road, rather than the beginning of the problem. This also seems to happen a lot in software engineering.

A tradeoff, where you see N desirable properties as being in conflict with each other should be seen only as a starting point that takes you either to 1) an innovation; 2) a mathematical theorem that states why that is absolutely unavoidable.

Tradeoffs set a baseline against which one can either successfully innovate or provide mathematical proof. If you do neither, you are just perpetuating truisms that, at some point in the future, will be deemed as exactly what was holding us in place.