You are funny. You are trading with etoro. They are a bucket shop. You are buying NOTHING. You are not taking physical delivery of a currency, and worse still, you are trading on margin. You are not buying anything, there is absolutely no product involved.
You cant even delude yourself that your transaction helps with liquidity in the international markets because it does not. Your transaction is just a number in an order book at a book makers. It helps noone (except the owners and sharholders of etoro who profit from your lack of knowledge), your transaction is completely irrelevant. Its offset against some other equally clueless market participant.
I pity you really, this is a tough enough business to be involved in, without carrying the added burden of psychological issues due to religion.
Is everyone having post-vacation blues syndrome or what?
Lately a lot of posts are all around trolling and giving names to others (or however that is expressed), couldnāt we all relax and take a deep breath?
Butā¦ in a essence, isnāt he breaking even with a losing trade (putting money at risk, uncertain of the result of the next roll, spin, etc.) with a winning trade (getting compād for just playing) with possibilty of some profit (being on the right side of a 50/50 trade more often than not based on probabilities and having a good time because of the hostess)? It sounds like he is aware of the result of future actions. That is his strategy. Half gambling/half not gambling. There is skill in his realization of what his actions will give him and plays this to his advantage but in the actual playing, it is still pure luck and gambling.
What is it made from? The casinos know that for every 1 big winner, there are 100 losers that cover their loss (not an exact #). Such is very true with things like slot machines where the payout can be set to happen at certain intervals. Do they not have an edge here? And again, with roulette, where there are a # of variables that determine the outcome (speed ball is thrown, how fast wheel is spinning) which results in absolute randomness. While their edge here cannot be completely controlled, they are on the receiving end of profit for a high # of losers as oppose to the winners (1 out of 36 odds, correct me if Iām wrong) which are for the most part always separate entities and can never gain an edge over the casino.
OK, when you place an order with your broker, does someone call around to your home or office and deliver a physical product ? Do they take X GBP from you, and exchange it for Y EUR ?
Does someone take a physical product and place it in storage for you ?
Do you take a physical product and pass that onto the person you eventually sell too ?
No you dont, your transaction sits on an order book. Its not even transacted on a pubic exchange, it does not even influence the interbank exchange rate. The participants in the market dont even know that your transaction even happened.
Your business is constrained within the internal boundaries of your bookmakers platform. You are gambling, with other gamblers, on a platform that was designed to fascilitate gambling, with a business entity who are regulated under the powers of a gaming authority.
Even if you tell me, that e-toro sends a man around to convert X GBP to Y EUR, and you physically take delivery, and then sell those EUR at a later date to your local bank, or a tourist in the street, its still speculation.
Dont try to muddy the water, we are discussing if forex trading is gambling.
Youāve suggested that a physical product changes hands, Iām suggesting that no such transaction takes place. Are you aware of e-toroās market capitalisation or the funds they hold, or their daily transaction volume. Think carefully before answering.
look what we buy in forex is electronic money or e-money. to see the real thing you can go to any money changer and buy 100 dollars in cash. then keep that cash at home in form of physical thing. after a week go back and change it to pounds if rate is up. this is exactly similar to what happens in forex. in forex for our ease they introduced electronic money but it is exactly similar to real money in real world. its a great invention to have electronic money like we using in moneybookers,paypal etc. world is much easier after e-money invention. thanks for reading my post
read my last post as well. i give you an example of gold. if you buy now in physical form and keep at home. after may be a month or even year price will go up and you can seel. people do car business like this. you buy cheap and sell expensive. there are many businesses like this. you can even buy cheap goods from auctions and sell expensive on ebay for profit. they are all businesses
Both of these are muddying the water a bit as they are merely a means to an end. You could for example, trade on the open market if you wanted, does that make it any different? If you now trade on the open market, would that classify the trading process any differently? No.
Your trade is a straight out bet on the market so it is a form of gamble. It does not mean that informed decisions cannot be taken as part of the process ie fundamental or technical outlooks on a countryās economy, etc. etc.
I believe is a form of gambling, but with some differences with trading.
The main difference is that: in trading the event never ends as the market keeps moving.
In a gambling game, you have to participate to lose and do absolutely nothing to stop losing. If, after one bet, you donāt put another bet on the table, you will not lose. There is also no way youāll win. But, at that point (if you donāt place another bet), there will be no risk.
Obviously, in trading itās very different. You must participate to get in a trade, and you must participate (in other words do something) to cut your losses. If you do nothing, the possibility exists that your entire account can be wiped out. And even that wonāt stop your losses if you still do nothing. (Although, at that point, your broker will most likely participate for you).
Regardless of what anyone believes, trading as defined by the factual definition of gambling is gambling.
You are betting money on an uncertain outcome. Wether it takes any amount of skill or if you are buying anything phsyical has no bearing on wether or not it is gambling.
Forex trading IS gambling. That is a straight up fact wether any of you religious nut jobs want to accept it or not.
If you canāt accept that you both donāt understand the nature of trading and donāt understand the concept of factual definitions.
Just because your religeon or belief says that it is not, does not change the fact that it is in fact gambling.
[B]Also someone mentioned you can gamble without any knowledge or skill, but canāt do that with trading. [/B] That is straight up baloney. You can open virtually any size account with a broker and trade it away in two days. You can trade without any studying skill and barely even knowing how to operate the trading platforme. MT4 is easier to start using than most video games.
You canāt change facts to justify your sins against your religeon. So, you try to justify the behavior.
ANYONE that canāt accept that trading is gambling has no business trading. [B]That includes you tymen[/B]. Traders that canāt accept this run into huge problems because they canāt accept that wins/losses are randomā¦just like gambling. And the best any trader can do is put probabilites on their side the best they can for every trade, BECAUSE NOTHING is ever certainā¦like proffessional gamblersā¦who do it as a BUSINESSā¦FOR A LIVINGā¦
P.S. dhoee476 you donāt have a clue what you are talking about. You should stop making threads trying to justify doing things that go against your beliefs.
And that is a form of speculation, which is alsoā¦ GAMBLING.
These are all the same arguments you put up in the other thread, all your arguments were speculationā¦ betting something would go up in price in the future, speculation, which is gambling.
[B]Sorry the definition of gambling isnāt going to change just so you can feel good about disobeying your religeons edicts.[/B]
If you where looking for some form of justification that your gambling/trading was providing a useful service to society you could argue trading an open market was providing liquidity, and the benefits that brings.
Its a weak argument and clutching at straws. It could easily be counteracted by much stronger moral arguments. There are people starving in parts of the world partially due to speculative trading driving up the price of commodoties, Iām not sure how anyone with religious beliefs can reconsile that (other than by acknowledging that theyāre not [I]really[/I] trading, theyre gambling at a bucket shop, and they have zero impact on the real world)
Yes I had a problem with that justification too. According to this religious website on gambling, they write this about itā¦
[I]It is obvious that the moral aspect of the question is not essentially different if for a game of chance is substituted a horse-race, a football or cricket match, or the price of stock or produce at some future date. Although the issue in these cases seldom depends upon chance, still the moral aspect of betting upon it is the same in so far as the issue is unknown or uncertain to the parties who make the contract. Time bargains, difference transactions, options, and other speculative dealings on the exchanges, which are so common nowadays, add to the malice of gambling special evils of their own. [U]They lead to the disturbance of the natural prices of commodities and securities, do grave injury to producers and consumers of those commodities, and are frequently attended by such unlawful methods of influencing prices as the dissemination of false reports, cornering, and the fierce contests of ābullsā and ābearsā, i.e. of the dealers who wish respectively to raise or lower prices.[/U] [/I]
Yes, the open market is also used as a hedge for business purposes. Hedges still go wrong despite their intended purpose I suppose.
Out of interest what examples do you have of speculation in commodities related to starving? Iām not saying speculators couldnāt do that but itās not that simple in a market made of of many participants.
Iām not sure religious beliefs have any place in the argument here, a bit of a āred herringā though I acknowledge what you are referring to from the earlier threads.
People like to think they are investing in companies when they buy shares but the reality of it is that everything is done on the secondary market. The only way you could invest in a company directly, and therefore provide some use to society, is if you got hold of the shares at the IPO.
I think religious beliefs have a great bearing on the argument. Why else is there such a problem with calling it gambling. The only problem I can see with it being called gambling is if it makes it illegal, or immoral. Itās not illegal, so the resistance to calling it gambling must be the immoral one.
