Is trading Gambling or not .."What say You" Vote here.

Is Trading Gambling or not

  • Gambling

    Votes: 460 35.0%

  • Not Gambling

    Votes: 854 65.0%
  • Total voters
    1,314
  • This poll will close: .
If you are trading to make money..and if you are trading with house money...then the question begs...isn't gambling requiring uncertain outcome with net consequences?

if not...

trading can be "not gambling"

what say you?
 
If you make money and reduce your size after you bank the initial...then is everything on red?

The net result justifies the "not gambling" means...

you can always stop....

there needs to be a consequence in your dictionary definitions..

Think outside of the box...not on a trade-by-trade basis.

there is more than one edge by the way...

it is possible to reach the "not Gambling" zone...believe me...i know what I am talking about...
 
Quote from ElectricSavant:

If you make money and reduce your size after you bank the initial...then is everything on red?

The net result justifies the "not gambling" means...

you can always stop....

there needs to be a consequence in your dictionary definitions..

Think outside of the box...
More...


Sorry Michael but your not even in the same room, never mind the box :D
 
lol...yes many have noticed that...hehe...

I like to think that I am in a "can".. lol

What kind of car do you drive?


Quote from Joab:

Sorry Michael but your not even in the same room, never mind the box :D
More...
 
This topic seems to popup from time to time; I think trading is gambling. My profits would have been much lower if I didn't place a lot of capitals in a couple trades. It is definitely gambling.
 
I will tell you ...you can reach the trading is "not gambling"...peak of the mountain...

There is also more than one way to reach the not gambling altitude, without the simple example of trading with house money. but unfortunatly I do not share it.

I am 100% sure but I can't prove it. You would just need to believe...have faith....

trading can be "not Gambling"

you can define infinity...
 
here is an example of MANY....(We have not even discussed arbitrage)

if you went long a currency at 10 bucks...

and you went short at same time.....at 10 bucks...

I do not believe the currency goes to zero unless you were in Argentina trades...(sky is falling mentality..so that some can deduce that trading cannot possibly be "not gambling")

You are trading...maybe you are not trading wisely...but you are trading. ...

You have also defined infinity.

as your short can only make you 10 bucks without leverage...
so this is step one...

now...for trading to become gambling in this scenario, one would have to take on direction so that their can be a consequence or there is not any gamble...right?

now I want you to imagine how you could manage this trade and put time on your side knowing that a short can only go to zero...

no limits to your management...you are 100% correlated and you could use weightings, levels...whatever you want...but I want you to imagine how you could maintain your riskfree direction...

and...

I really want you to think about this...hehe

Michael B.

So now..the new questions will arise...does gambling not only require a consequence but also a benefit...with its unknown outcome? Because if no benefit is needed...then there is no gamble? Now does one gamble for the consequence or the benefit?..and to make the paradox if the outcome is unknown how do they choose?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top