BTC a chance to change the deadlock of 1% rich peple holding FIAT capital - page 2.

pearlmen

sr. member

Activity: 322

Merit: 250

Quote from: gregory51gosh on June 02, 2017, 04:40:46 AM

I think, there is another big thing why BTC is so treated hostile. Banks have their own interest. But many rich people are very addicted to FIAT connotations and the structure of cryptocurrency may change the general structure of possession.
This may build a thesis that:
- crypto currencies are pumped to give a strike in a moment to 'alienate the fashion' to BTC and show how 'BTC and crypto' is bad for the economic system
- or they are locking into positions to make is centralized through smooth control of the course of crypto
- or it is just a sheep run pump, as it goes.

I would like to open a discussion on that. What do you think?

Your point of view is one way to look at it but on the other hand, it worthy to note that the issue of bitcoin prices is actually dependent of the majority moving with the swings in terms of prices. Its possible we might not be able to separate the human artificial factor in the determination of prices, but at the same time, the majority give them the power to do so by falling in line as a result of panic buying or selling. But if we are to maintain our position, we then realize that the forces are just too minute to determine our direction.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3486

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: webtricks on June 27, 2017, 01:22:46 PM

Considering the continuous rise in Bitcoin value, I don't feel Bitcoin will be able to change this deadlock.
Alternatively, it will follow the similar pattern as FIAT does.
Suppose someone bought BTC for $400 three years ago, now in present he automatically becomes 7 times richer than those who will buy BTC with same amount of FIAT. As a result, when cryptocurrencies will become wide-spread to 20-30% of Population, early adopters will directly comes in top 1% bracket who bought BTC at low prices as compared to those who will buy at this time because supply remains constant

Top holders are not early adopters for the most part

Indeed, some have been holding their coins since inception (e.g. Satoshi with his 1M stash of bitcoins), but their numbers are set to decrease with time, this is inevitable. Some of them are just passing away (like Hal Finney) and then their coins are either lost for good or just wasted (well, sold) by their inheritors and relatives. Some of them lost their coins in the Mt. Gox scam. Those who didn't likely sold the best part of their stashes anyway. The bottom line is that the top bracket almost always has a considerable part of nouveaux riches (so-called new money). It is the same with fiat, for example, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett make up new money (while Rothschilds and Rockefellers are old money)

webtricks

legendary

Activity: 1918

Merit: 1728

Considering the continuous rise in Bitcoin value, I don't feel Bitcoin will be able to change this deadlock.
Alternatively, it will follow the similar pattern as FIAT does.
Suppose someone bought BTC for $400 three years ago, now in present he automatically becomes 7 times richer than those who will buy BTC with same amount of FIAT. As a result, when cryptocurrencies will become wide-spread to 20-30% of Population, early adopters will directly comes in top 1% bracket who bought BTC at low prices as compared to those who will buy at this time because supply remains constant.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3486

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: btcney on June 27, 2017, 02:04:07 AM

There is a chance that bitcoin will change this

As to me, that's highly unlikely

A couple years ago there were a few threads discussing Bitcoin distribution and wealth inequality thereof, and the conclusion was not very promising overall. Bitcoin wealth distribution is as skewed as it could ever get. It was said that around 1,000 people hold (held back then) the total majority of all coins, so Bitcoin is not a lot better in this respect than fiat (in fact, it may be even badder). And what is even more discouraging, it is along the same lines with any valuable asset out there, and that seems to be sort of natural outcome even if there was an even distribution of that asset initially

Barnabe

hero member

Activity: 616

Merit: 503

★Bitvest.io★ Play Plinko or Invest!

Quote from: BartS on June 26, 2017, 11:18:21 PM

Banks and governments love their fiat because they can steal form the people by simply printing more money, they do not have to find where your money is hidden they can steal your purchase power and they hate bitcoin because they cannot do that.

I agree, in my opinion, the power on money is the only thing that governments are afraid to lose. Bitcoin as a way of storing money is exactly like fiat. If someone is rich and bitcoin becomes massively adopted they will simply change their cash for bitcoins. The price increase will only create a handful of new rich early adopters. A rich person will remain a rich person even if tomorrow gold or bananas are used to trade.

btcney

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

There is a chance that bitcoin will change this.

I would say that there are already billionaires made from cryptocurrencies. Satoshi probably has a few billion dollars which is definitely a nice chunk of coin, even though he might not spend it just yet.

I see a lot of people arguing about when bitcoin becomes widely adopted, there will still be the elite holding the majority of the coins. OF course, this is an issue. However, is there anything that can be done to change it? Besides, this discussion is about 1% rich people holding fiat, not how many bitcoins do the 1% elite hold.

BartS

sr. member

Activity: 980

Merit: 255

Banks and governments love their fiat because they can steal form the people by simply printing more money, they do not have to find where your money is hidden they can steal your purchase power and they hate bitcoin because they cannot do that.

Xavofat

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 559

Did you see that ludicrous display last night?

Quote from: tsaroz on June 26, 2017, 11:21:01 AM

Quote from: Xavofat on June 26, 2017, 07:59:35 AM

Quote from: gregory51gosh on June 02, 2017, 05:43:40 AM

Old analysis but showing that 1% of population may hold ~50% of all money: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30875633

I wonder what are the statistics of BTC and currencies. If it reaches over 51%, there is real possibility for BTC to be controlled by 1%. This is something like centralization for me.

Cryptocurrencies are extremely centralised in terms of holders. You have people like Roger Ver who put his money less than ten years ago and is now extremely rich.

When the price goes up too dramatically, it naturally results in centralisation unless all of those early adopters sell along the way.

Not actually,
With Fiat, The government levies tax from the high earners and tries to redistribute it.
But with bitcoin, there is no such mechanism, so bitcoin will make the rich more richer.

You're basically agreeing with me, under the guise of not agreeing with me.

The current system of taxing higher earners is not working properly, because poorer people tend to spend a higher proportion of their income on static taxes e.g. VAT. So fiat is naturally extremely uneven.

Bitcoin could naturally be similar to fiat, it's just a short term problem that dramatic surges in price have resulted in centralisation of Bitcoin holders.

tsaroz

legendary

Activity: 2982

Merit: 1069

Quote from: Xavofat on June 26, 2017, 07:59:35 AM

Quote from: gregory51gosh on June 02, 2017, 05:43:40 AM

Old analysis but showing that 1% of population may hold ~50% of all money: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30875633

I wonder what are the statistics of BTC and currencies. If it reaches over 51%, there is real possibility for BTC to be controlled by 1%. This is something like centralization for me.

Cryptocurrencies are extremely centralised in terms of holders. You have people like Roger Ver who put his money less than ten years ago and is now extremely rich.

When the price goes up too dramatically, it naturally results in centralisation unless all of those early adopters sell along the way.

Not actually,
With Fiat, The government levies tax from the high earners and tries to redistribute it.
But with bitcoin, there is no such mechanism, so bitcoin will make the rich more richer.

Xavofat

hero member

Activity: 938

Merit: 559

Did you see that ludicrous display last night?

Quote from: gregory51gosh on June 02, 2017, 05:43:40 AM

Old analysis but showing that 1% of population may hold ~50% of all money: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-30875633

I wonder what are the statistics of BTC and currencies. If it reaches over 51%, there is real possibility for BTC to be controlled by 1%. This is something like centralization for me.

Cryptocurrencies are extremely centralised in terms of holders. You have people like Roger Ver who put his money less than ten years ago and is now extremely rich.

When the price goes up too dramatically, it naturally results in centralisation unless all of those early adopters sell along the way.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3486

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: darthmaul on June 25, 2017, 07:38:19 AM

Though top level people will hold most of the bitcoin then also it doesn't mean they can control it. They might be able to control the pumps and dumps (which is rare) but they can't really regulate the bitcoin in their way for price speculation. The bitcoin is limited as we all know and only some percent of which is in circulation. The fiat connotation is completely different from the crypto world an decant not be compared with it. So though holding most of the bitcoin won't affect the bitcoin economic structure for sure

It depends on what they are up to

They likely don't need to have complete control over Bitcoin just like you don't always need to have a 50% plus 1 share stake to effectively control a company. Sometimes you can do almost anything with a lesser stake in it. With Bitcoin, it is essentially the same. You can just grab enough coins to beat it down to death, i.e. make it totally unusable by constantly crashing the prices and buying more and more cheap coins at lows. This is not always possible but, on the other hand, completely wiping the coin may not be the ultimate goal in the first place at all

Hydrogen

legendary

Activity: 2562

Merit: 1441

AFAIK large banks typically hold trillions in derivatives exposure. The amount of balance sheet wealth banks have on paper literally rivals the GDP of nations. That's what bitcoin and crypto are up against if they hope to someday capture a significant proportion of the world's wealth--enough to make a difference.

The way things are now the combined market cap of crypto is like a grain of sand in comparison to the wealth of elites which is an entire beach.

That also doesn't take into account whether elites are buying GPU's & ASIC's en masse, otherwise taking steps to take control of crypto infrastructure and politics. Microsoft, JP morgan, banks, VISA are heavily invested in eth. They could create their own crypto and assimilate it.

darthmaul

sr. member

Activity: 714

Merit: 252

Though top level people will hold most of the bitcoin then also it doesn't mean they can control it. They might be able to control the pumps and dumps (which is rare) but they can't really regulate the bitcoin in their way for price speculation. The bitcoin is limited as we all know and only some percent of which is in circulation. The fiat connotation is completely different from the crypto world an decant not be compared with it. So though holding most of the bitcoin won't affect the bitcoin economic structure for sure.

deisik

legendary

Activity: 3486

Merit: 1280

English ⬄ Russian Translation Services

Quote from: cellard on June 07, 2017, 01:05:15 PM

Quote from: gregory51gosh on June 02, 2017, 04:40:46 AM

I think, there is another big thing why BTC is so treated hostile. Banks have their own interest. But many rich people are very addicted to FIAT connotations and the structure of cryptocurrency may change the general structure of possession.
This may build a thesis that:
- crypto currencies are pumped to give a strike in a moment to 'alienate the fashion' to BTC and show how 'BTC and crypto' is bad for the economic system
- or they are locking into positions to make is centralized through smooth control of the course of crypto
- or it is just a sheep run pump, as it goes.

I would like to open a discussion on that. What do you think?

It will be a switch of elites... in money, there are always elites, so if you are hoping for BTC to be some sort of fair thing then you are dreaming.

We will go from fiat elite to BTC elite

As to me, that's mostly bullshit

Or just severe misunderstanding what the elites are made of. In short, money cannot buy you a place there. Further, I don't think that having a few million dollar worth in bitcoins (or with just a few million dollars) are going to make you into "the neighborhood". Money is important, but wealth is certainly not about money as such. If you somehow have 100B dollars in cash (aliens print this money for you), you still won't be able to buy real wealth with it, e.g. businesses, power, influence, etc. Most likely, your fiat wealth will be quickly declared null and void as soon as authorities become aware of it

Lancusters

sr. member

Activity: 630

Merit: 263

Quote from: Mometaskers on June 04, 2017, 06:54:14 AM

Nah. Cryptocurrencies would always end up at the hand of a small elite, just like fiat. Mostly early adopters would be those on the top but as in the case of bitcoin, the people rich in the traditional sense (plenty of liquid money) can simply afford to buy in as much as they want after they have weighed in on possible profits.

Quote from: Doms on June 02, 2017, 05:55:34 AM

There will never be total equality in this world. The rich always becomes richer because they end up joining forces with other rich people. Meanwhile, the poor and the common man continue to struggle with his daily life, trying to make ends meet, some living from paycheck to paycheck. That’s the harsh reality of life when it comes to wealth distribution. The gap between the rich and the poor has never been wider, and I don’t think bitcoin or any other currency can really tilt the balance in favor of the less privileged ones.

Only communists ever believed it'll be possible for people to be all the same. Some people would just be gutsier, luckier, smarter or more industrious. Just look at bitcoins. Those who bought $1000 of it on 2010 would already have $46M by now. Grin

For me the ultimate goal is just to keep the gap as realistically small as possible and to allow enough social mobility so that it's possible for people to go up the ladder in less than 3 generations.

In 2010, the people's attitude towards bitcoin was much easier. I haven't heard any stories that someone kept their bitcoins and become a millionaire. Spent some of it at the first opportunity. We all remember the example with the pizza. Luck is in your hands and who knows, maybe you become someday a millionaire.

cellard

legendary

Activity: 1372

Merit: 1252

Quote from: gregory51gosh on June 02, 2017, 04:40:46 AM

I think, there is another big thing why BTC is so treated hostile. Banks have their own interest. But many rich people are very addicted to FIAT connotations and the structure of cryptocurrency may change the general structure of possession.
This may build a thesis that:
- crypto currencies are pumped to give a strike in a moment to 'alienate the fashion' to BTC and show how 'BTC and crypto' is bad for the economic system
- or they are locking into positions to make is centralized through smooth control of the course of crypto
- or it is just a sheep run pump, as it goes.

I would like to open a discussion on that. What do you think?

It will be a switch of elites... in money, there are always elites, so if you are hoping for BTC to be some sort of fair thing then you are dreaming.

We will go from fiat elite to BTC elite.

Of course, the good news is that we are ahead of the pack and we can still become elite. "1 million club" thing by holding 21 BTC is a good way to put yourself in a good long term position.

gregory51gosh

sr. member

Activity: 364

Merit: 250

Analysis is the key.

I think it is also element of being the early adopter - benefits are higher, however risk is higher too.

For example:

BTC - early adopters produced BTC, now professionals do, it is impossible to do single mining

altoins - the same scheme, now anyone can make an altcoin..

tokens - created are tools like waves that enable release of token in couple of seconds.

smart tokens - represented and covered in smart contracts (as basis)

I wonder what is the next derivative.

Mometaskers

hero member

Activity: 1764

Merit: 584

Nah. Cryptocurrencies would always end up at the hand of a small elite, just like fiat. Mostly early adopters would be those on the top but as in the case of bitcoin, the people rich in the traditional sense (plenty of liquid money) can simply afford to buy in as much as they want after they have weighed in on possible profits.

Quote from: Doms on June 02, 2017, 05:55:34 AM

There will never be total equality in this world. The rich always becomes richer because they end up joining forces with other rich people. Meanwhile, the poor and the common man continue to struggle with his daily life, trying to make ends meet, some living from paycheck to paycheck. That’s the harsh reality of life when it comes to wealth distribution. The gap between the rich and the poor has never been wider, and I don’t think bitcoin or any other currency can really tilt the balance in favor of the less privileged ones.

Only communists ever believed it'll be possible for people to be all the same. Some people would just be gutsier, luckier, smarter or more industrious. Just look at bitcoins. Those who bought $1000 of it on 2010 would already have $46M by now. Grin

For me the ultimate goal is just to keep the gap as realistically small as possible and to allow enough social mobility so that it's possible for people to go up the ladder in less than 3 generations.

btcney

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

The problem with crypto is that no matter how you distribute it whether through crowdfunding or in bitcoin as case, just letting it into the wild and wait for early adopters, there will always be a small portion of early adopters or early investors that hold most of the coins.

But yes, I think it really does change the fact that the top 1% of people all holding fiat. I've seen several pretty rich bitcoiners that have most of their capital in bitcoin and alts. But still the price has to increase a lot for anyone to make it into the top say, .0001%. But it will happen.

pitham1

legendary

Activity: 1232

Merit: 1000

Quote from: bouren on June 02, 2017, 12:58:02 PM

No, no and no...
BTC cannot prevent the concentration of income in top bracket or we say top 1% rich club. Generally we consider those to be rich who have large amount of fiat wealth, etc. So now if we consider dominance of BTC over fiat nothing would change as there are enough holders in case of BTC with numerous amount and people who enter market now will hardly able to hold BTC as equal to earlier adopters. This will make the wedge in case of BTC too as similar to fiat.

At least the top 1% holders of fiat and top 1% of holders of bitcoin are different. Bitcoin may redistribute wealth, but it is possible that we would still have a standard 80-20 distribution curve, with a different set of people.
That isn't too bad, in my view.

Topic: BTC a chance to change the deadlock of 1% rich peple holding FIAT capital - page 2. (Read 1848 times)