This is my take:
Silk road gets taken down.
People wait a week to see if Bitcoin can exist without it.
Bitcoin does fine.
Oh shit, legit currency guys! BUY BUY BUY!
LOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOL!
Silk road was a huge part of it but if you really want to know why bitcoin is doing fine, its because mt gox bitstamp btc-e dont want it to fail. They can do whatever they want with the price. there are no rules or regulations that they have to abide by. They are smart business owners. Why would you let the golden goose die? As long as there are more suckers out there that jump on board it will keep going.
Hey fleabag, nice post history. Not sure why you're so bitter, though...
THE TRUTH HURTS HUH? SO TELL ME THERE IS GOING TO BE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF NEW MILLIONAIRES IN THE NEXT 10 TO 20 YRS? SURE. ALL THE WEALTH IN THE WORLD IS GOING TO BE REDISTRIBUTED BECAUSE OF BITCOINS?
Though I tend to avoid feeding trolls I will reply to this post and see the tone of any reply before clicking the ignore button:
If Bitcoin takes off on the longer and larger scale an inevitable consequence is that early holders (that's us folks) will become very wealthy. I am not one that defends the 'righteousness' of this, claiming that all the smart, early, risk-embracing folk that did jump/are jumping on board and participate in its growth have 'earned' or 'deserve' the scale of increase in the value of our holdings just as I don't believe landowners who happen to be sitting on a plot in an area whose popularity goes through the roof have 'earned' their increase in wealth. But it happens - and has happened for centuries - until something changes to prevent it from happening.
As an aside I happen to believe in the case of land a land value tax is a just means of ensuring those who play a role in making a location more popular (businesses, the police, providers of public transport, newcomers and all productive people in that locale) also reap some of the reward. In contrast I don't believe Bitcoin savers/'hoarders' do any harm because it in no way limits those who arrive late to the party from using it to its potential so I don't believe a means should be found to 'redress' the extreme increases in wealth from having got in early. It doesn't mean to say (and maybe this is one of the things you're hinting at) that governments and/or central banks and/or today's wealthy won't take steps to prevent this transference of wealth from happening. This is a potentially interesting debate.
However I would recommend if you want to learn something - and there are many smarter than me that frequent these pages from whom a lot can be learned - as opposed to shouting generalities and conspiracy theories I would recommend calming down and thinking what your concerns are before posting. That way others are more likely to participate and learn from the exchange too. Just a suggestion