The only problem I see right now, is since this would be based on a "staking your funds" in order be selected to verify transactions, this would probably make it an even more centralized system, then POW.
Im not sure about that.
Staking money seems not too much different from buying ASICS + electricity to me.
Big mining farms lead to to 'centralisation', just as masternodes or staking does.
I would argue that PoS leads to more centralization in that you put too much power into the hands of people that already own significant amounts of cryptocurrency. Very reminiscent of the traditional financial system, if it comes down it.
With PoW you might have an overlap between whales and miners, but for the most part they are separate groups within the ecosystem, keeping each other in check. At least in the case of Bitcoin, where most coins have been mined before industrial-grade mining farms became common.
And yes, even if coins get ASIC resistant, people could still gather a lot of GPUs, or create big mining pools, but even doing so it would be less centralized than what we have now with ASIC mining.
Assuming that mining hardware manufacturing becomes more mainstream and widely available (eg. Samsung), ASIC mining might become just as decentralized as GPU mining. I'm not yet holding my breath though.
Either way, I'm not sure if ASIC resistance is actually attainable. Taking Scrypt of Litecoin for example, ASICs may always emerge given a large enough market. However I know next to nothing about the technical limitations of developing ASICs, so some of the currently used PoW schemes may indeed be fully ASIC resistant.
