Will a credible population counter run in reverse to the point that the population at the end of the week is lower than the start (7 day rolling, not Sunday to Sunday), and this is not due to a technical glitch or recalculation of previously false data/assumptions?
1,000People are also trading
@StevenK Will a credible population counter run in reverse to the point that the population at the end of the week is lower than the start (7 day rolling, not Sunday to Sunday), and this is not due to a technical glitch or recalculation of previously false data/assumptions?
@Duncan Hmm, so if the birth rate stays roughly the same, I guess this amounts to asking whether there will be 1.5 million excess deaths in any one week.
@StevenK So, some people are reading this as "Will a credible population counter run in reverse to the point that the population at the end of the week is lower than the start (7 day rolling, not Sunday to Sunday)" and some people are reading this as "Will a credible population counter run in reverse to the point that the population at the end of a period of at least a week in length (7 day rolling, not Sunday to Sunday) is lower than the start."
I don't mind changing it to the second, and I think that might be a better market, but that strikes me as an important change. Comments?
@Duncan If the population decreases during a four-week month, then it has to decrease during at least one of those four weeks, right? So I don't see how one of those could be true and the other could be false.
@StevenK I think you're right; they are equivalent. I was confused by thinking about years, but the month-long example cleared up my thinking.