It is not a zero sum game. Say tomorrow, the company is pruchased out at 250 per share.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
zero sum game?????????????
- Thread starter madmunny
- Start date
It is not a zero sum game. Say tomorrow, the company is pruchased out at 250 per share.
Quote from reactor:
LOL if I buy a share for 100 bucks, someone gets my 100 bucks and I get a share.
If the share goes up to 200 bucks and I sell it at that price, I get 200 bucks and someone is now out of pocket for 200 bucks.
That extra 100 bucks profit has come from outside into the market, but that money has come from somewhere and this is the whole point of a zero sum game. If the 100 bucks came out of nowhere, it wouldn't be zero sum.
If the markets are a positive sum game, you will always get back more than you put in, because money would be appearing from nowhere, which everyone knows is not true as the money is coming from someone else.
If the markets are a negative sum game, you will always get back less than what you put in, because the money would be disappearing into nowhere, which again everyone knows is not true, as the money is going to someone else.
Zero sum is like accounting; for every debit, there is a credit and vice versa.
Just because it is a zero sum game does not mean you can't make money. It just means you need to be skillful at extracting it from others.
Oh boy, not this discussion again! This topic has been beaten to death already.
Here's the deal. Excluding commissions and taxes. Derivatives are a zero-sum game as they merely re-distribute wealth. Companies and thus their stock, on the other hand, can create or destroy wealth because companies actually make something or provide some service, i.e. they take inputs, add value and provide outputs.
For the love of God, can't you people see that stock trading is a zero sum game? For every stock trade made, one person makes money and another loses money. Just because MOST daytraders lose money doesn't discount the zero sum theory. It just means that most traders stink. The good consistent ones are taking most of the poor traders 'money.
Even assuming their are no short traders, if I bought GOOG at $300 and sold it for a profit at $320, I will have taken money from the poor slob who bought at $340 and got stopped out at $320. This is called VOLATILITY. Stocks don't move up (or down) a perfectly straight line. There are peaks, valleys, gap ups/downs in every stock chart and this is where people make and lose money even on a stock that goes up from $1 to $400. Not everyone wins when the stock climbs because of VOLATILITY. This clearly shows that stock trading is a zero sum game.
Even in a fantasy world where a stock goes up in a straight line, there will be people mistakenly calling the top and losing money. As long as there are bulls and bears and competing sentiments, trading will always be a zero sum game.
Don't you people understand this simple concept about trading? C'mon...
Even assuming their are no short traders, if I bought GOOG at $300 and sold it for a profit at $320, I will have taken money from the poor slob who bought at $340 and got stopped out at $320. This is called VOLATILITY. Stocks don't move up (or down) a perfectly straight line. There are peaks, valleys, gap ups/downs in every stock chart and this is where people make and lose money even on a stock that goes up from $1 to $400. Not everyone wins when the stock climbs because of VOLATILITY. This clearly shows that stock trading is a zero sum game.
Even in a fantasy world where a stock goes up in a straight line, there will be people mistakenly calling the top and losing money. As long as there are bulls and bears and competing sentiments, trading will always be a zero sum game.
Don't you people understand this simple concept about trading? C'mon...
When a company goes to zero on an exchange, the companies competitors will benefit. Again, another example of zero sum game.
If the entire US market goes to ZERO then the economies of other countries (China, India, England, etc.) will reap the benefits. Again, this is a zero sum game!
Even accounting for growth and wealth creation, stocks are a zero sum game because of the influx of new players entering the investing arena. Even without the new players, the big players would still take up the slack.
Macro Econ 101 people! C'mon!
If the entire US market goes to ZERO then the economies of other countries (China, India, England, etc.) will reap the benefits. Again, this is a zero sum game!
Even accounting for growth and wealth creation, stocks are a zero sum game because of the influx of new players entering the investing arena. Even without the new players, the big players would still take up the slack.
Macro Econ 101 people! C'mon!
Quote from goldenarm:
If the entire US market goes to ZERO then the economies of other countries (China, India, England, etc.) will reap the benefits. Again, this is a zero sum game!
Macro Econ 101 people! C'mon!
That would be correct if and only if there was a finite amount of wealth. As long as there is growth in wealth it cannot be zero sum.
I think many of the zero sum people on this board have watched and taken the movie "Wall Street" a little too literally.
Repeat after me.
It's only a movie. It's only a movie.
Where is this magical growth of wealth coming from?
More and more people in the world, is there such a thing as more wealth being handed out? With a printing press in the hands of central banks, there is no such thing as new wealth.
Is America increasing so called "wealth" faster than the debt of America?
Is a Bush tax cut really a tax cut or is it in fact just taxes deferred? Deferred to your children?
ZERO sum game, WHO cares, just trade it and good luck. Remember, there ain't no such thing as a tax cut, just putting the propaganda out to make greedy nerds feel good. ....:eek:
More and more people in the world, is there such a thing as more wealth being handed out? With a printing press in the hands of central banks, there is no such thing as new wealth.
Is America increasing so called "wealth" faster than the debt of America?
Is a Bush tax cut really a tax cut or is it in fact just taxes deferred? Deferred to your children?
ZERO sum game, WHO cares, just trade it and good luck. Remember, there ain't no such thing as a tax cut, just putting the propaganda out to make greedy nerds feel good. ....:eek:
Quote from bighog:
Where is this magical growth of wealth coming from?
More and more people in the world, is there such a thing as more wealth being handed out? With a printing press in the hands of central banks, there is no such thing as new wealth.
Growth of wealth comes from business and investing. Capitalism is a great thing. Start your own business and become successful. I don't think you will believe there is no such thing as new wealth.
Let me put it a different way.
What were computer sales in the year 1800? Since there were none sold did that market take away demand from some other product? I don't think so. Wealth is created by new inventions and business ideas. Wealth is not zero-sum nor is the stock market since it represents companies that have those ideas and inventions.
What were computer sales in the year 1800? Since there were none sold did that market take away demand from some other product? I don't think so. Wealth is created by new inventions and business ideas. Wealth is not zero-sum nor is the stock market since it represents companies that have those ideas and inventions.