5 ms·
The argument that crypto is not gambling just because some coins reported >0% returns is rather weak. The first definition of Gambling I found; >> the act of
by apnew 3y ago
The argument that crypto is not gambling just because some coins reported >0% returns is rather weak.
The first definition of Gambling I found;
>> the act of playing for stakes in the hope of winning (including the payment of a price for a chance to win a prize).
- elif 3y ago"some coins reported >0% returns" is weak I agree. Fortunately my point was that the main 2 "report >100% returns for every single 'player' who waited 5 years." using your gambling definition, I would say that "chance" to return a prize is not accurate as it is a "virtual if not outright certainty" historically speaking.
- Eisenstein 3y ago> for every single 'player' who waited 5 years. For every player who bought coins and put them in a cold wallet and sat on them? Because otherwise the chances are pretty high that they got scammed, lost their coins in an exchange collapse, lost access to them, or, you know, traded them like every other person who deals with coins who didn't die or lose their wallet keys or forgot about it.
- throwawayadvsec 3y agoi'm not a crypto supporter, but the same applies to the stock market, housing, or any business or investment
- NickM 3y agoStock shares are an investment because the stock market is a positive sum game in the long run. Yes there are risks but the returns produced by the market are due to actual value being generated in the form of goods and services. Investing in Bitcoin is like investing in shares of a company that produces nothing, and which only is able to fund its continued operations by continuing to issue and sell more shares once every ten minutes. Investing in a real compay that worked that way would be considered crazy, but somehow it’s supposed to be different because it’s decentralized. The financial implications are the same though; it’s a negative sum game instead of a positive sum game. That’s why it’s more like gambling than an investment. The amount of money that comes back out is always going to be less than the amount that goes in, in the end.
- throwawayadvsec 3y ago"because the stock market is a positive sum game in the long run" No, in the actual long run you and every of your descendants dies and the earth get disintegrated.
- tanseydavid 3y agoIs someone who day-trades stocks an "Investor" or a "Gambler"? I think most people who day-trade would call themselves "investors" but it seems precisely like gambling to me. Can trading stocks be both "investing" or "gambling" depending on how you approach it?
- MacsHeadroom 3y agoDay-traders tend to not call themselves investors. They call themselves traders. Investing involves holding assets long term. But they certainly don't call themselves gamblers. At least not any that turn it into a successful career.
- stouset 3y agoThey are gamblers.
- thunky 3y agoYou can gamble with anything, to include things that aren't worthless like food, housing, stocks, etc. You can also invest in them. But you can't invest in worthless things.
- xmcqdpt2 3y agoIs the day trader in your example trading their own money? Because most traders aren't. They are bank and fund employees with KPIs, risk management oversight, massive support functions and very expensive computer programs. Retail investors that are day trading on the other side of those professionals are absolutely gamblers though.
- re-thc 3y agoThose you mention are regulated (to some extent). Is crypto? Main issue. Not a level playing field.
- throwawayadvsec 3y agowe're not arguing about regulations or ethics, he was just saying that it was just gambling, more regulations wouldn't change that
- Cardinal7167 3y agoBut crypto _is_ regulated. The SEC has been clear about how to treat and tax crypto.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> SEC has been clear about how to treat and tax crypto The SEC has no authority over how crypto is taxed.
- Cardinal7167 3y agoTheir guidance to treat it like a security has clear tax implications, im obviously not saying they control the tax legislation itself.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> guidance to treat it like a security has clear tax implications Not really. These are independent decisions. The IRS may incorporate the SEC's views into its guidance, but that's simply a courtesy.
- spacebanana7 3y agoThe difference is that many consumers used crypto as a gambling tool. More so than in those other classes The precise definition of gambling varies by jurisdiction, but ultimately the thrill of prizewinning and dangers of addiction/financial loss were enjoyed by large numbers of crypto buyers [1]. I personally bet on Ethereum the same way I bet on sports teams whose players I enjoy watching. [1] Admittedly my evidence is mostly anecdotal, but it seems like everyone knows somebody who used crypto like this
- yellowapple 3y agoI know plenty of people who used and continue to use stocks in the exact same way, particularly on apps like Robinhood.
- spacebanana7 3y agoI think it’s fair to call that behaviour gambling too. Options and derivatives that create or extract artificial volatility out of economic prices are gambling tools in the hands of most consumers. The underlying source of randomness for a gambling instrument doesn’t really matter as long as it’s statistically well behaved. The physical uncertainty of a roulette wheel, the economic uncertainty of the business cycle and the athletic uncertainty of a sports match all do the job.
- yashg 3y agoNope. Businesses and housing have real utility. They are of value. Real value. Crypto tokens are a game of finding a bigger fool to make money.