Leaders? Are you awake at the wheel?
Leaders? Are you awake at the wheel?
People using Polymarket are gambling on pretty random things and must understand the risk , whether it is on major geopolitical events or someone counting cars going through a junction these events can all be manipulated pretty easily.
People want to gamble on random things? Let them.
If anything is regulate the other side, people in government can’t use sites like polymarket because I don’t want them making stupid decisions so bets fall one side or another.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/18/polymarket-gam...
Not necessarily, it depends on the pressure and the intent.
> In America we generally make bad things illegal, not activities that could become motivation for bad things.
I didn't mention making anything illegal. I suggested constraining Polymarket and similar.
> Should we ban [X]
I didn't mention banning anything.
Not really, even in America. Like, take alcohol regulation. Your model would be "drunken bar fights are already illegal, so just prosecute that, problem solved."
Except that, historically, there's so much of that that it overwhelms the ability of law enforcement to keep up. So we try to remove the driving factors: "Okay, you can drink in public, but only[1] at these licensed places that are heavily incentivized to prevent fights before they start."
I'm not advocating any particular position, I'm just saying that if there's a persistent situation that heavily incentivizes violence, then it's not unreasonable to push back on that mechanism rather than just try to mop up the violence after the fact. Which specific situations merit that is up for debate, but it shouldn't be controversial that some situations should be handled this way.
[1] Yes, I'm simplifying, just focus on the general point here.
What if 100% of the bets you place in a slot machine go to the owner? It's the exact same thing here.
Slot machines are regulated so the game is fair and they're not simply machines where the rich steal from the poor. Such a machine would be scam by definition.
I would say casinos and slot machines are already stealing from the poor and giving to the rich and already a scam, people play them (aside from addicts) because there is a chance they will win, they know not everyone wins.
I'm in favour of people being treated fairly I just think regulation isn't what is required here, more education "play this but the odds are tilted away from you".
Gambling is a risk, it isn't just the house's edge but anything can go wrong on the day.
At least it would somewhat hinder the type of activity we’ve seen (where journalists are threatened by criminals to withdraw or change their stories) without just banning such betting exchanges outright.
If a gov't official (including the president) is leaking classified information, there's already laws about that isnt there? (Whether it's effective is another question - i'm assuming it's currently effective).
Its potentially much worse: we don't know if the threats and bets are isolated. While diplomacy happens, the threats may very well be exaggerated to create the market opportunity.
Are you saying the "sector of betting on shit that can clearly be insider-traded" is illegal? Does that include like gold and S&P500?
The way I see it, prediction markets' main function is to connect gamblers with insiders posessing useful information. Are you concerned for the gamblers losing? But they were gonna lose anyway, one way or the other. Or are you concerned about the insiders winning? Sucks, but at least the public gets information by way of the prediction market being more accurate.
I’m concerned about people with addictions being exploited by greedy degenerates who don’t care about the negative externalities with which they’re burdening our society, yes.
This isn't a "who knows" situation.
Gambling is particular, specific burden and crime against society that's been recognized as such for thousands of years.
The recent experiments with legalizing it on an industrial scale are simply experiments with legalizing crime. We don't have to touch the stove but I guess simply being told about what happens isn't enough for us.
The insiders might as well run a backroom prediction market and just manipulate the public market.
And even with bigger sums: you never know if it isn't just a variant of the shell game. There are no real signals.