Is there a difference between investing and gambling?

Ever since erupting in early 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic has been a driver of speculation
and uncertainty in the stock market. To this nebulosity, many have responded with an old yet
common critique -, claiming that Sstock market investing is no different than gambling. In
this paper essay I will attempt to counter this criticism in two ways: firstly, I’ll argue that
investing and gambling, though sharing similarities, differentiate substantially with in regards
to the level of chance luck attributed to the each activity. Secondly, I will stress that the claim
is irrelevant, due to its lack of moral significance.

Before presenting the first counter-argumentcounterargument, it is important to define

precisely each activtyactivity that is under discussion. Thus, gambling is commonly defined
as staking something of value, usually money, on a contigencycontingency. Meaning, a
gamble would involve risking something of value on an event whos outcome that carries a
great level of chancerisk. On the other hand, investing would be defined as an act of
commitingcommitting capital to an asset with the expactationexpectation of reaping a profit
generated from the asset in the future.
It is easy to conclude thatG gambling and investing share two main important
similiartiessimilarities: they both involve risking capital in the hopes of making a profit, and a
key principle in both activities is to minimize risk while increasing the potential reward.
Having that said that, though there are a number of differences between the two activities, but
I will be focusing on mearlymerely on one with of great importance: the difference in the
level of chance attributed to the activity. In short, the odds of profitngprofiting over time
from gambling or investing are far greater in the latter activity. This is dueo to the fact that
gambling is fundimentalyfundamentally constructed so that “the House” holds a
mathematical edge over the gambler. The more the gambler ingagesengages in the activity
over a longer period of time – the more the advantegeadvantage of the house increases. To
the contraryon the other hand, it has been statistically shown that stock market investors on
average enjoy positive returns over time. Hence it may be concluded that though there may
be gamblers who occasionally beat the house or investors who have lost their fortune in the
stock market, yet on average and over time the chance of reaping a profit is greater for the
investor as apposedopposed to the gambler.
The second counter-arrgumentargument asserts that the criticism mentioned above has no
significant l moral relevance. In order to understand this assertion, it is important to
breakdown the logical structure of the critique, while stating its implicit and explicit
propositions and objectives. The argument consists of two main propositions: (1) gambling is
a moralymorally negative activity that should be avoided, and (2) investing and gambling are
similar activities which involve risking capital in the hopes of making a profit.
ThereforTherefore, the conclusion, being that investing is a negative activity that should be
avoided, may be derived from the propopositionspropositions. This argument is flawedhas a
few flause. For one, proposition number (2) is vaugevague and general, due to the fact that
there are differences between the two activities, as shown in the paragraph above. Being so,
Tthis causes another logical faulty in which the conclusion doesn’t necessarily derive
necesseraly form the propositions. This is because Nnot only are there differences between
the two activities, but moreover they differ particularly in the negative asspectsaspects
attributed to gambling. meaning, contrary to investing, gambling includes staking money on a
contigencycontingency that is statistacllystatistically designed to make the gambler lose. This
asspectaspect of the activity would be defined as irrational and selfdistructiveself-destructive,
and hence ongoing engagmentengagement in such activity would be considered morally
wrong. therefortherefore, even if gambling and investing are to the most part similar in some
ways, due to the fact that investing lacks the negative behaviourbehavior attributed to
gambling, this claim loses its moral significance and becomes irrelevant.

To In conclusionde,, I have shown that gambling and investing, while being similar
activities, differ in the level of chance included attributed to eachin the activity. In particular,
I asserted that Ccontrary to investing, gambling is an activity designed to favor the house
over time the odds of the house at the expenceexpense of the gambler. Thus, I concluded that
Iinvesting lacks the negative asspectsaspects attributed to gambling., and hence Tthe stated
claim, even if generalypartially true, is irrelevant due to its lack of moral significance.

Much better
Try using more of your own words next time -
https://www.investopedia.com/articles/basics/09/compare-investing-gambling.asp
Not that this was something you needed to know, but when I wrote the question – this was
the direction I was thinking of - https://www.businessinsider.com/difference-between-
investing-and-gambling-2015-10. Essentially discusses the diffrences between gambling and
investing in the stock market (and not stock markey vs casino)