GoofyGoose
3d ago
- I still don’t understand your point of view on this. Why is there a difference between acquiring a real asset versus a financial asset (that is someone else’s liability? You mentioned wealth creation, but trading financial assets/securities creates wealth. Trading happens under mutual agreement which means both parties are better off.
- Using that segue, prediction markets create value in the same way that any trading creates value. What gives rise to two people wanting to trade with each other? Different situations in or different beliefs about the future. This is the simplest libertarian argument for freedom to trade with each other.
GoofyGoose
4d ago
-
This makes no sense to me. What is the key difference that matters in your opinion? Is it the probability of payoff? Prediction shares are binary, so if one side has low probability, the other one has high probability. Start-up equity has low probability of success: are they in the same category? Is the issue that they hold your money until the event? We could imagine a type of prediction markets where we put shares of VOO instead of cash. Would that change your view on them? The shares are going to be held anyway, so there is no inefficiency there.
-
You don’t need to assume that perfect information is good to think prediction markets are good. That’s a strawman if I ever saw one. You might be able to make a strong case for banning prediction markets based on negative effects of too much information, but it won’t be a strong case unless you explain why it wouldn’t be better to, say, have their players contracts prohibiting this and enforcing it.
I don’t understand the american obsession with entrapment. In other countries the definition is more lax and sting operations are used to greater effect.
Can you explain why the fence is there, beyond ‘a cop forced me to do it’?
More options
Context Copy link