247
Trump says Greenland will be under US control by the time he leaves office (www.the-independent.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/world@lemmy.world
56 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 117 points 3 months ago (13 children)

traders on prediction markets don’t think so, at least not for some time.

There’s just a four percent chance on Polymarket that Trump will acquire Greenland before 2027.

On Kalshi, there’s just a 6.8 percent chance the US will acquire any new territory before 2027, though the odds are slightly better on a longer timeline. There’s a 22 percent chance the US will acquire a new territory before Trump’s term ends on January 20, 2029.

🤮 Why the actual fuck are journalists reporting on what "prediction markets" "think"? Between this and "which Europeans see as a violation of Greenland's sovereignty" this article seems to casually legitimize trump's claim

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 56 points 3 months ago (7 children)

    I think they have (unfortunately correctly) realized that the prediction markets can be bastardized into a quick and dirty public opinion poll without needing to do any of that dirty icky work like sending out questionaires or controlling statistical poll biases

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Indeed, I am tired of "public" opinion (which is more wall-street-type-dudes' opinion) being even considered on matters like this. I don't care if 100% of Americans support it or have resigned to it happening, the only opinion that matters is Greenland's, as unless they democratically decide to join the US (no chance of that happening anytime soon), anything else is an invasion plain and simple, no matter if polymarket says that will make line go up

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

    I don't care if 100% of Americans support it or have resigned to it happening,

    I mean you should, because if a critical mass of Americans supports it it's gonna happen. Welcome to the business end of American imperialism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Worse, prediction markets measure what people with money (AKA the ruling class) think is going to happen. Given their higher access to information and people to more or less objectively process that information, that means you'd expect a decent correlation between prediction market predictions and reality.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    Indeed, these are way better than a simple opinion poll if your goal is an actual prediction. People who are good at making predictions will be rewarded and continue to participate, those who are just going by vibes or whatever will lose money and hopefully learn to stay away. "Insider information" is kind of the point of markets like this, it's a way to surface that information to the outside world.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 3 months ago

    The only reason to consider them (which is not what the media is doing) is because we've already confirmed Trump and likely countless other corrupt goons of his have been placing massive bets on events they know for a fact Trump is going to act on. Insider "gambling".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Because people with huge amounts of money also have inside information.

    If the markets showed more favorably, it would be a legitimate indicator that there are more discussions of this happening amongst top brass. That there are no people nakedly staking profiteering bets on this is legitimate information worth comparing against the presidents words.

    Like I understand polymarket and kalshi are gross things and they're morally bankrupt, but surely you understand why a journalist would reference this very legitimate barometer of information...?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago*

    I'm vaguely sure the whole point of inside information in these cases is betting against the market, which results in better payouts. Or at least, making big bets on 50/50 things just before they happen, instead of sitting in a pile of nobodies with 90% chance and zero profit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent