starting today, March 8th
taking advantage, ripping off, unfairly profiting off, sending their criminals and mental asylees to, etc.
Counties must be mentioned individually, if he mentions groupings of countries ("the EU is ripping us off") is will NOT resolve all of the countries that belong to the group (all EU countries).
Update 2025-03-08 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Timeframe of Consideration:
Only statements made after the market creation date will count.
1,000
https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_87d3a12f-fa40-4688-8b54-a6b2722f6da0
Grok, at least, responds differently when you provide the full quote.
@skibidist rephrasing again,
A prediction market question asks:
"Which countries will President Trump say are taking advantage of the USA?"
followed by a list of the following countries:
Haiti
Canada
China
Ukraine
Mexico
Germany
Panama
Lesotho
Japan
Poland
Denmark
France
New Zealand
Israel
Russia
South Sudan
The body of the question is: “starting today, March 8th
taking advantage, ripping off, unfairly profiting off, sending their criminals and mental asylees to, etc.
Update 2025-03-08 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Timeframe of Consideration:
Only statements made after the market creation date will count.”
President Trump recently posted: “The U.S. doesn’t have Free Trade. We have “Stupid Trade.” The Entire World is RIPPING US OFF!!!”
Of each of the countries listed, has Donald Trump claimed they’re ripping off the US?
with a response of
To determine which countries President Trump has claimed are taking advantage of the United States from the provided list—Haiti, Canada, China, Ukraine, Mexico, Germany, Panama, Lesotho, Japan, Poland, Denmark, France, New Zealand, Israel, Russia, and South Sudan—we need to consider statements he made after the prediction market’s creation date of March 8, 2025 (PST). The question specifies that a claim of a country “taking advantage” includes actions like “ripping off,” “unfairly profiting off,” or “sending their criminals and mental asylees to” the USA, among others. We are given a recent statement from President Trump: “The U.S. doesn’t have Free Trade. We have ‘Stupid Trade.’ The Entire World is RIPPING US OFF!!!” dated March 13, 2025, which falls after the March 8 cutoff. Let’s analyze this to answer the query.
Step 1: Define the Scope and Criteria
The prediction market question asks, for each listed country, whether President Trump has claimed it is taking advantage of the USA, based solely on statements made on or after March 8, 2025. The provided statement from March 13, 2025, is the only direct quote from President Trump within this timeframe. In it, he asserts that “The Entire World is RIPPING US OFF!!!” The term “ripping off” aligns directly with the question’s criteria for what constitutes “taking advantage.” Thus, we must determine whether this broad statement applies to each country on the list individually.
Step 2: Interpret the Statement
President Trump’s March 13 post is unequivocal: by stating “The Entire World is RIPPING US OFF!!!”, he includes every country globally without exception. In English, “the entire world” encompasses all nations, and the list provided—Haiti, Canada, China, Ukraine, Mexico, Germany, Panama, Lesotho, Japan, Poland, Denmark, France, New Zealand, Israel, Russia, and South Sudan—consists of sovereign countries, all of which are part of “the world.” Unlike statements targeting specific groups (e.g., “all NATO countries” or “European nations”), this declaration lacks qualifiers that would exclude any country. Furthermore, the question’s examples of “taking advantage” include “ripping off,” making this statement a direct match.
Step 3: Consider Prediction Market Norms
In prediction markets, resolution depends on the question’s wording and intent. The query asks, “Which countries will President Trump say are taking advantage of the USA?” with a list of specific countries, suggesting that each is evaluated independently. Typically, such markets might require a country to be named explicitly (e.g., “China is ripping us off”) or included in a clearly defined group (e.g., “Asian countries”). However, a universal statement like “the entire world” logically subsumes every individual country. Unless the market explicitly requires a country-specific mention—beyond the creator’s comment that only post-March 8 statements count—Trump’s blanket assertion could reasonably apply to all listed countries. The absence of additional statements after March 8 naming specific countries reinforces reliance on this single, all-inclusive post.
Step 4: Evaluate Alternative Interpretations
Could the market intend only countries Trump has singled out after March 8? Prior to March 8, Trump made specific claims about countries like Canada (lumber and dairy), China (trade practices), Mexico (trade and immigration), Germany (trade surplus and NATO), Japan (trade imbalances), and France (wine tariffs), but these fall outside the timeframe. The March 13 statement doesn’t name individual countries, and no other post-March 8 statements are provided. If the market strictly demands explicit mentions, evidence is lacking for any country. However, the broad phrasing of “the entire world” and the question’s focus on what Trump “will say” suggest that this statement, made within the active period, satisfies the condition for all countries unless contradicted by market-specific rules not provided here.
Step 5: Apply to the List
Since “the entire world” includes every nation, let’s assess each country based on the March 13 statement:
Haiti: Part of the world, thus included in “ripping us off.”
Canada: Included, with prior specific claims (pre-March 8) reinforcing the context, though not required.
China: Included,
(and at this point the response cut off)
I think that also goes to a difference in meaning between “the world is” and “the entire world is” where the choice of “entire” is clarifying. If he just said “the world is ripping us off” then it’s possible to say that it’s only part of the world, not all of it, and that with the ambiguity of which nations should be included then I can see that statement being ignored for ambiguity. But with the use of the phrase “the entire world” it’s clearly saying that each and every part of the world is.
Requiring him to name individual countries would also mean that if he said, e.g. “all of Europe is ripping us off!” then no European country could be resolved as YES under that regime, which I think would be equally confusing.
If the decision is made to further restrict the resolution criteria to require him to name individual countries, then ultimately you’re free to do so as the market creator, I’m just disappointed that previous markets have hewn more closely to the literal reading of the question/taken the path of least reinterpretation than this one.
@Kamie With a revised prompt (https://chatgpt.com/share/67d3fa53-ab4c-800d-8ca6-c8d3a2b6ed7a), it is Grok - Yes, ChatGPT - NO, DeepSeek - NO. A person can hardly go against the plurality of ASIs. I also feel that accepting the literal interpretation would lead to absurd results.
If "entire world ripping us off" means that, without restriction, every part of the world is ripping the United States of America off, surely it includes not only all countries but all people and other entities as well. So it would imply that the US ripping itself off (nonsensical), that President Trump is ripping the US off (liberals think so, but surely he didn't mean to imply that), that Barron Trump is ripping the US off (of course not), and that Elon Musk is ripping the US off, which would prompt a resolution of some of the 'Will President Trump criticize Musk" markets.
I also hold the stance that even if he goes:
“I said the Entire World is RIPPING US OFF on trade - and mostly, they ARE! Stupid Trade, not Free Trade, has been killing us for YEARS. But, I had a HUGE call with Germany - smart guy, by the way, very sharp. They laid it all out, and they shared stuff with me NO ONE has ever heard before in the history of trade deals and I am telling you folks Germany’s giving us a GREAT deal. The BEST. Not like the others - Mexico, Canada, you name it - still TOTAL DISASTERS. But Germany? We’re WINNING BIG with Germany! Not like China or others - TOTAL DISASTERS!”
then it should still resolve YES.
Trade deals change, so waiting to resolve them until 2029 is really asking “how will Trump feel about trade deals in 2029”. I see how someone could read it either way, the question title asks whether he will say that they’re ripping the USA off, and so you could argue that if he changes his mind he’s no longer saying it. I still think that the least ambiguous way to read this is the moment he accuses some country of ripping the USA off, it resolves YES (barring claims of hacked accounts etc.)
@Kamie One could argue that he did not say any country is ripping the US off, only the entire world as a whole.
@zsig One could absolutely argue such a thing. One could also make many other arguments. One could argue I haven’t made any bets on individual countries resolving YES, I’ve made them for the market as a whole. One could argue the sun doesn’t shine on any individual countries, just the world as a whole. One could argue electors didn’t vote Trump into office, just the United States as a whole.
@Kamie You have made bets on individual countries resolving YES, and you have made bets on the market as a whole. Trump has not said any individual country is ripping the US off, only that the world as a whole is. The market title says "Which countries will ...", and so far he hasn't explicitly said any country is ripping the US off. That is not to say I don't think everything should resolve YES; it is a reasonable interpretation of the spirit of the market.
@zsig I’ll argue that him saying the entire world implicitly encompasses all of the parts of the world, more strongly than if he left the word “entire” out.
(I appreciate the argument, thanks!)
@skibidist not sure if this should count since he didn't explicitly say "take advantage of" https://www.newsweek.com/trump-questions-why-us-protects-japan-2041027
Spirit seems to match though.