There is currently a bill stuck in committees in Congress that would make Daylight Savings Time permanent.
When it passed unanimously through the house in 2022, health advocates pointed out that it would be healthier to abolish Daylight Savings Time than to make it permanent.
Resolved in time for 2026 midterm elections.
Update 14 Mar 24: This market resolves NA if Trump doesn’t win.
Related:
Possible clarification from creator (AI generated): The creator has identified ambiguity in whether this resolves based on:
Abolishing daylight savings time completely
Making daylight savings time permanent (year-round)
The creator plans to change the title to clarify it refers to permanent daylight savings time. If there are objections, the market will resolve NA and be recreated with clearer criteria.
1,000People are also trading
Or maybe it’s both / choose your own adventure per state ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@traders i just realized how ambiguous the title of this question is, since the proposal that passed the Senate would make daylight savings time permanent, not abolish it.
Please weigh in if you bet on this question assuming it asks:
Will daylight savings be abolished OR
Will daylight savings be made permanent
Since the description hasn’t changed, if no one objects I’ll change the title to “If Trump wins, will we have permanent daylight savings?”
If there are objections, I’ll NA this question and create a new clearer one.
@BlueDragon I came across this market with the gut intuition that if the time was locked into a permanent "setting" year-round, then that would count as YES. However, after doing a quick study-up and learning the terminology of things, I am now hesitant to place a trade.
Disclaimer: I hold zero shares on either side at time of posting and am trying to figure out how to interpret similar markets on this subject.
@BlueDragon I'm not entirely sure. I definitely see where you're coming from, and the recent drop in odds seems to suggest the people are trading with the literal by-the-word definitions.
It might be worth putting a disclaimer at the top of the description that would highlight this ambiguity so it's the first thing a trader sees. Perhaps adding a "(read description)" to the title could also be a welcomed courtesy too.
@Quroe right, I noticed a few weeks ago that the title was misleading, my mistake, not intentional, I just wrote the title and later did the research, so I posted that I was going to change it, waited for comments, got none, so changed it. It now aligns with the description. I did that because it seems fairer that way. People are betting it down because now they are actually reading I guess? Honestly I can see it both ways, but would rather have had the conversation when I raised the issue and asked for input.
@traders unless anyone has a compelling objection I’ll edit this to say “a democrat” instead of “Biden” tomorrow 7/23/2024.