Zero Sum Games
Thread and Full Text View
This question is a little broad since the answer depends on the way you play.
For me it is not a zero sum game. I buy a portfolio of stock which I expect to appreciate over time reasonably in line with the level of systematic risk [View full text and thread]
|08/19/2002 02:21 PM by DBS; Is the stock market a 0 sum game? Depends on how its play.|
"Because of this, I think that a game begins with any transaction where the subsequent gains captured by one party (i.e. gains by the buyer or losses avoided by the seller) are equal to the losses realized by the other (i.e. losses by the buyer or gains foregone by the seller), at the very least on an "opportunity cost" basis."
|08/10/2002 10:23 PM by name withheld; then aren't all trades zero sum?|
Doesn't the above apply equally well to all economic trades? By that reasoning, I'd say, "Yes, it is unreasonable to assert that the stock market is a zero-sum game, since it leads to an absurd conclusion: all economic exchanges are zero-sum games." I wouldn't buy eggs if it weren't beneficial for me to do so, nor would you sell sans benefit, would you? You could say that the marginal trades per se are zero-sum because you buy/sell until marg. benefit equals marg. cost, but up to that point both parties gain--which is impossible in zero-sum contests.
The stock market has been set up and maintained for one purpose, for big fish to eat the little fish. This doesn't mean some little fish don't make money, but far, far more get eaten. This is not a simple "me against the house" game, [View full text and thread]
|08/01/2002 07:10 AM by John Lofton; You Can Bet Your As It's A Zero Sum Game|
Itís a juggling game, not like a single clown juggling many items. It is like a rock concert crowd and a single beach ball. (The players all paid to get in and participate in the show.) As interest and effort swells, the beach ballís [View full text and thread]
|02/15/2002 08:35 PM by Wreckerbill; oops... here is the full text|
Go easy on my first post :) I think my view of the stock market is much more fun. (check out the full text) [View full text and thread]
assuming the stock market has a relation with the real world out there, it should not be a zero sum game, because productivity can increase. if productivity increases, more is produced for each input, thus *really* increasing the wealth [View full text and thread]
|12/02/2001 05:03 AM by nico; consider productivity increases|
I don't believe that stock markets are not a zero sum game.
As long as there is someone who is willing to accept a high risk security
in return for a higher expected return both the buyer and seller are better off. This kind of risk [View full text and thread]
See the existing discussion.
[View full text and thread]
|05/29/2000 09:44 PM by name withheld; Click on the thread for a discussion of this|
My professor and I are disagreeing on this subject. I believe that while the commoditiy markets are a zero sum game, the stock markets are not. He believes that both are zero sum games. Any comments or simple ways to prove or [View full text and thread]
|05/24/2000 11:44 AM by Tom; Is the Stock Market a zero sum game?|
To concur with the previous answer, I think that most economists would not regard the stock
market as a zero-sum gain. It is true that trading just for capital gains has this property:
but we also hold stocks in order to save and in [View full text and thread]
It is trivial to observe one person's monetary gain is another's loss. But there can still be a net gain in utility (welfare). When I buy homeowner's insurance my insurance company makes an actuarial profit, but I am still better [View full text and thread]
I assert, based on intuition and a vague proof of sorts resulting from a hypothetical game I constructed, that equity securities markets are zero-sum games. I suggest that the changes in wealth associated with a particular lot [View full text and thread]
|01/26/2000 09:36 AM by name withheld; Is the stock market a zero sum game?|