Not disagreeing here, but centralization and decentralization are not the only states possible. They are two abstract ideal ends on a continuum. A fully centralized system doesn't exist; centralization of information asymptotically approaches total singularity, and decentralization likewise approaches total entropy.
Who is the winner between two players in a game? When all other factors are the same?
The person, who spends less energy (takes less resources outside the system)
I believe what you are trying to make is a practical, moral observation about who benefits from Bitcoin's cash flows. But really this is necessarily true of any system that requires its participants to distinguish between the value of resources outside itself vs inside itself, and who must choose, based on this distinction, whether to move some of their own resources from outside to inside.
This is very good point.
Let us calculate together the "product" and the "resources" based on principles "outside" and "inside".
What is the product of any transaction system like fiat money and bitcoin?
What banks do produce? What bitcoin system produces?
Banks do not produce money and bitcoin network do not produce bitcoins.
Both systems produce secure transactions.In this game the winner will be the system, where the cost of resources per one transaction is less (if we talk about the same security)
These systems can co-exist together if one of them is better in security for users and another is better by cost of usage.
Right now bitcoiners think that the cost of usage is small. They are confused the "cost of usage" and "transaction fees".
Transaction fees are small, but the cost of usage is very high.
It can be calculated as ( AmountOfElectricuty + CostOfHardWare ) / NumberOfTransactions
)