Years ago there was a libertarian proposing this as "assassination politics": simply create a system that allows people to bet that "politician X will be assassinated before time T". People who want X assassinated take the other side of that bet. Eventually there may be enough money in the pot that someone considers it worth making the hit and collecting the bet, and the people on one side have paid for it without directly paying for it.
Yes. The market facilitates payment for crime, e.g., you can't buy a company's secrets from employees directly but in a free predictions market leakers would be paid. Looks like a cynical way to expand the scope of what you can buy with gobs of money, beyond the current boundaries of law, decency and fair play.
>you can't buy a company's secrets from employees directly but in a free predictions market leakers would be paid.
Conversely though it creates an incentive for information to flow to everyone in the market instead of just to insiders. Despite shitty motives, it seems like it forces more transparency which seems like a net positive.
