Most recent numbers are just above 70. I still see a high likelihood of downward pressure due to unpredictable political decisions, but the impact is slightly delayed and may not bring the total below 70 for the year.
No Scores Yet
Relative Brier Score
16
Forecasts
0
Upvotes
Forecasting Calendar
| Past Week | Past Month | Past Year | This Season | All Time | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Forecasts | 0 | 0 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
| Comments | 0 | 0 | 16 | 16 | 16 |
| Questions Forecasted | 0 | 0 | 9 | 9 | 9 |
| Upvotes on Comments By This User | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Definitions | |||||
Most Active Topics:
Geopolitical Security,
Russia-Ukraine War,
Emerging Technology
Most Active Topics:
Cybersecurity,
Emerging Tech - AI,
Russia-Europe,
Economic Debt,
East Asia Security
Star Commenter - Sep 2025
Why do you think you're right?
Why might you be wrong?
The impact may be delayed, or may be far less impactful than I expected.
Why do you think you're right?
Trump has continued to fully support Russia on this file, and Russia is making advances on the battlefield. Russia sees no reason to end the war right now, especially given that severe economic contraction would almost certainly follow the end of the war, and may destabilize the government. The US actions that are strengthening China's global influence are also reducing the impact of sanctions as countries aligned with China continue to do robust business with Russia.
Why might you be wrong?
Sudden overthrow of the Putin government by other elites is always possible, highly unlikely in the current environment, but possible. I see that as the only pathway to immediate peace.
Why do you think you're right?
There are no signs of this happening today, and the question expires tomorrow.
Why might you be wrong?
Surprise attack is always possible.
Why do you think you're right?
The average rate for 2024 was 70.1%, a slight increase over 2023. While I anticipate a significant drop due to US incompetence and unpredictability, I don't believe the full force of that will yet reach the labour market in 2025.
Why might you be wrong?
Several of the OECD countries are actively falsifying data, or fired the statisticians and stopped publishing data. The falsified data these countries are likely to produce may alter the average.
It is also plausible that the drop will be more rapid and severe than I predict.
Why do you think you're right?
The US has abandoned education, science, and medical science in particular. While the current students are likely to graduate as expected, there are unlikely to be many people willing to invest the huge sums in a US education in medical science in the coming years as the employment prospects in the field will be severely limited by research funding cuts and a general disdain for scientific work. Motivated individuals are likely to seek foreign education and employment. Very few foreign PhD students would continue to seek enrollment at US universities.
Why might you be wrong?
Given the time it takes to obtain a PhD, the current class already enrolled may be sufficient to exceed my prediction.
Why do you think you're right?
While North Korea is not seeking war with South Korea, they are emboldened by their stronger partnerships with Russia and China. They are also likely going to seek to test US resolve in defending South Korea. China is highly motivated to demonstrate to Taiwan that the US will not defend an ally, so their increased provocation of the Philippines is one method, and their tacit permission to the DPRK to antagonize South Korea with some limited lethal force would also be demonstrative to Taiwan. It's a slow boil of getting the world used to Trump not responding with military force to attacks on allies so it is not so unthinkable when China takes Taiwan prior to the end of the Trump presidency.
Why might you be wrong?
A variety of factors could impact this forecast, including that other antagonistic measures not included in the specific list would be used.
Why do you think you're right?
Trump's recent assertion that Ukraine can fully retake territory will embolden both sides to continue fighting, and the statement has not resulted in any US commitment to further assist Ukraine in bringing the war to an end. Trump's statement has also made it politically impossible for Zellensky to accept any settlement that would give up territory for now.
Eirope also announced further loans to Ukraine from seized Russian assets, which provides Ukraine resources to continue the war.
Why might you be wrong?
Ukraine may suddenly see that the US has no intention of helping, and that Europe may be well intentioned, but is not willing to commit troops to assist Ukraine with a rapid solution. A pragmatic response to such a realization may be a rapid settlement accepting lost territory.
Recent Ukrainian attacks on oil infrastructure are impacting Russian citizens. A popular uprising is highly unlikely, but possible.