Stock 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.

Is 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?

Day-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.

You 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.

Is 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.

They are gamblers.

"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.

The 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

I know plenty of people who used and continue to use stocks in the exact same way, particularly on apps like Robinhood.

I 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.

Nope. 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.

Those you mention are regulated (to some extent). Is crypto? Main issue. Not a level playing field.

we're not arguing about regulations or ethics, he was just saying that it was just gambling, more regulations wouldn't change that

> SEC has been clear about how to treat and tax crypto

The SEC has no authority over how crypto is taxed.

Their guidance to treat it like a security has clear tax implications, im obviously not saying they control the tax legislation itself.

> 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.