I read through similar questions here, but feel they did not solve my confusion. I've been considering the prospects of day trading with my money verses investing. My confusion is
If we neglect broker fees, I'm assuming day trading (not investing) is zero sum. If someone were to trade randomly (without experience), it appears they'd win half the time and lose half the time. However day trading winners win at loser's expense and there is a small population of absurdly profitable day trading winners (some examples are given in Market Wizards by Schwager). These two ideas seem in direct contradiction.
I'll elaborate some. Although investing is not zero-sum as the market's value grows over a long period of time, buying and selling quickly is zero sum as the stock is only held a short time.
The Intelligent Investor by Graham and some people advises that although investing is great, day trading is a losing game for most. Graham attributes these losses to broker fees, market impact, and taxes. But even without them, could day trading still be a losing game for most? Particularly given the random nature of the market and the supposedly random betting of most people.
Edit: I don't quite understand the negative votes and perhaps you could help me. I tried my best to define the question well by highlighting it and tried providing where the question came from. The following seemed legitimate to me:
In a zero sum world where inexperienced traders bet randomly, how could the elite traders possibly take money from amateurs?