Betting for or against currencies is a controversy regularly discussed in the media. Its argument is that speculation that is merely done to exploit arbitrage opportunities have an effect on currency devaluations and ultimately an economic well-being of a nation. Economists, including Milton Friedman, argued that speculations have a positive impact on liquidity and contribute to stabilize markets. The risk-takers perform the important function of providing a market for hedgers and transferring risk from those people who do not wish to bear it.

While investments in conventional instruments like bonds or stocks are considered to contribute positively to economic growth by providing capital, currency speculation does not. According to this view, it is simply gambling that often interferes with economic policy. Former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad is one well-known proponent of this view. He blamed George Soros for the devaluation of the Malaysian Ringgit (MYR) in 1997.

Gregory J. Millman has an interesting counter-argument to this: According to him, speculators help to “enforce” international agreements and anticipate trends in order to profit. In this view, countries that mishandle their national economies attract speculators who make the inevitable collapse happen sooner. A quick collapse is even preferable to continued economic mishandling. Mahathir Mohamad and other critics of speculation are viewed as trying to deflect the blame from themselves for having caused the unsustainable economic conditions.