+1
Especially considering the fact that they are used interchangeably in common definition by Webster’s…
Interesting how the SEC sees it. They have a “Problem Gambling” link…
Guys, I just got off a conference call with Jesus, Muhammad, and Buddha. All of them gave their okay to Forex trading.
There is one big difference between the two groups of people here, the ones who claim forex is not gambling all seem to have a common purpose, they are arguing it is not gambling because they WANT it to not be gambling.
Some for religious reasons others for personal reasons in that they have a distain for gambling and those who engage in it.
Those of us who argue forex is gambling do not care whether it is gambling or not we have nothing to gain or lose either way. We argue this with an open mind, just for the reason all the factual based evidence proves it is so.
I say this means those of us who argue forex is gambling have the high ground in this discussion and the weight of unbiased open minded debate on our side.
Well, I must admit that I don’t really care if it is gambling or not. I enjoyed playing poker for many years before I started trading, and successfully too. So maybe it is.
However, I do not argue from an idealistic point of view. In fact I do not argue at all. All I look for is an activity where I can swing the odds in my favor. I did this when I went to university, then post-grad school, in order to reduce the odds of becoming redundant in the workplace. Anyone who just leaves school with the “hope” of finding and keeping a good job is gambling, in my book anyway.
When I started my own business many years ago, I took a gamble, but I knew I could swing the odds for success in my favor once again, and I did.
When I started trading, I did everything I could to swing the odds in my favor once again, and I did. Works for me.
On the other hand, going to a casino and playing slots/roulette/whatever, where you cannot swing the odds in your favor, you may call gambling.
I call it stupidity. 
hmmm, I hope you don’t include their names.
Yes there is no point gambling on games of chance where the outcome is entirely random, the smart guy gambles on an activity where even though the outcome is still uncertain, it is not random, then skill and knowledge can be applied to gain an edge.
What you mean by Gambling: the pejorative sense (most common people without math education would) or the “noble” mathematical sense of game theory (Game theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) ?
In both cases, one can answer yes but the connotation is not the same. Professional would take into account game theory implicitely or explicitely through probability of pattern and money management, the layman won’t do that he would just take position without thinking about risk management.
Of course fx trading is also known as gambling… hey, only hypocrites and loosers don’t admit/ accept that it is. Goodluck to all, peace!
Gambling is to play a game of chance,risks money and a game of toss.
If you do not know what you are doing and want to make quick money in forex market it’s gambling.
so is forex, a game of chance, market is random… it is therefore gambling 
Luck has nothing to do with it. You are either good at it or you are not. Luck is irrelevant.
If you seem to be having BAD LUCK trading forex then that just means you’re doing it wrong.
Just for the heck of it:
Statistic says 95% will loose and give up, meaning: see bold text
That is NOT the definition of gambling.
[B]The definition of gambling: “To bet on an uncertain outcome.”[/B]
All the arguments against ANY trading/speculation not being gambling are pointless.
When you put on a trade no matter your method, the outcome is always [B]uncertain.[/B]
So, unless you have a magical way to predict EXACTLY what will happen from entry. …
Guess what you are gambling when you trade. Because… you are betting money on an uncertain outcome.
It does not matter what method you use, if you actually buy or sell something, if probabilities are in the trades favor, if you figure with math of if you have 10 years trading exerperience and masters in business.
when you trade you are betting money on an uncertain outcome, thus you are gambling.
[B]This NOT my opinion, this is a cold hard fact. Trading, IS gambling, as factually defined in the dictionary for the meaning of the word gambling.[/B]
yeah. your right, in gambling you can win much much money at the same time, if its not your luck you will also loose much much many many money…:D:D
trade wisely
Life is a gamble!
It’s only gambling if you are not informed on what your are doing!
Education is the key!
Luckily with all the information on Babypips and the members willing to help out, you can educate yourself easily as well as find a mentor.
Looks like everyone is skipping your posts and I think it’s important for them to be looked. You make a very good point.
There’s no need to write long posts. If you (people in general) need so many words to explain something so simple then you don’t have it very clear yourself, and I don’t mean you The Phoenix.
The definition doesn’t take into account if you’re educated or not, if you are doing it blind folded or with an edge, that doesn’t change the fact that you’re gambling.
Well, there you have the definition, which is very concrete and specific, and Forex totally fits into that. No need to make second guesses.
It’s us who are putting to it calificative adjectives, the plain and simple definition doesn’t say wether it’s wrong or right, good, or bad. It just is.
Again, take a look at what gambling is… is there anything else left to say? I guess not.
They are skipping Phoenix’s post because he says it how it is and they don’t want to hear that any more than they wanted to take notice of it when I said the same thing.
What they want, is to find some kind of loophole, a get out, anything that they can grab onto that will allow them to exclude trading from falling under the umbrella of gambling, even if that means making false comparisons and ignoring the English definition of the word…
Gambling is a word that has been defined to mean staking money on an uncertain outcome and has been accepted as meaning exactly that by scholars, professors of languages, and everyone else who cares whether they are using the language they speak correctly or not.
I can’t understand how anyone can refuse to accept that and continue to argue this point.