Pages:
Author

Topic: There's a set amount of wealth that can exist and the majority of it is already - page 2. (Read 1782 times)

sr. member
Activity: 308
Merit: 251
I like big BITS and I cannot lie.
"There's a set amount of wealth that can exist and the majority of it is already concentrated in the hands of a few. If adoption increases, the problem only gets worse." (reddit commenter on bitcoin)

Can someone refute this? If not, I don't want to get into BTC. I like the tech behind BTC transactions. But with 60% of BTC wealth held by maybe 1-5 million people, the above quote seems spot on, doesn't it? With 12 million coins already in wallets, there's less than 0.001 coins left for everyone else.

Preface: I'm likely not going to address your question directly, or adequately. Its a strange question, because you are fearing what already exists which is the concentration of wealth...Worse? The fact is the current landscape provides bankers and governments free reign to do whatever they want. As the tip of the iceberg, simply look at HSBC and their money laundering business. I don't believe wealth concentration can get much worse without enslaving the human race completely.

I agree with the other commenter; I also don't accept the question as it is presented but I'll still try to give you my thoughts on it. Specifically, I would like you to elaborate on the numbers you've provided and how you got them. I think you probably just copied them, which means you don't know if they are correct or not.

Also, what kind of adoption are you referring to? Adoption by investors? Adoption by consumers? They are two very different thing. Adoption by investors indicates a long term strategy. Adoption by consumers indicates functional utility that offers an advantage to competitive products or services.

Where the connection is made to BTC being concentrated in the hands of a few people is deontological not teleological. I agree with the assertion that increased adoption will result is greater distribution of BTC. This doesn't address distribution of wealth problems directly, but do provide a greater number of people with a functional transfer of wealth that is separated from the centralized power structures. This means thats you and I decide the value and cost of transferring that value, not the banks.

I believe the most important thing to acknowledge about bitcoin is that its decentralized and deflationary. Conceptually, this empowers the community and removes power centralized systems or groups hold over the community.

If A controls scarce resources, and if B values those resources then A has power over B. This leads to dependence and the ability to control in a way that uses B as a means to A's ends(profit). That is the situation with banks. They control the monetary system, and we all must use money to buy necessities such as food, warmth and shelter. So therefore, we willingly give power to the banks in exchange for the privilege of using their system to acquire those necessities. There's no law that says we must, but how many people do you know that sit at the farmers market on Saturdays to barter their goods or services for food?  If alternatives are introduced (*ahem*, BTC) that remove dependence, then their power is diminished.

A major component of this power structure that banks and governments have created is controlling the flow of money. They decide how fast, or slow, and how expensive it is to transfer wealth. This allows them to very exactly dictate their profits, or the rate of concentrating wealth.  If they cannot control the resource, their power is diminished.

BTC will not end the US dollar or fiat currencies. If they do die, it will because of market forces and/or legislation. At least if that happen, now there is a viable, proven, and secure alternative which can fill the vacuum that will be created because the function of transferring wealth must exist in some form. It seems like a natural progression of the human raced to move beyond a centrally controlled system (infancy) to a distributed, socially controlled and validated system of wealth distribution (adolescence). Maybe some day, the human race will achieve the next level of maturity. I don't know what that would look like...
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
"There's a set amount of wealth that can exist and the majority of it is already concentrated in the hands of a few. If adoption increases, the problem only gets worse." (reddit commenter on bitcoin)

Can someone refute this? If not, I don't want to get into BTC. I like the tech behind BTC transactions. But with 60% of BTC wealth held by maybe 1-5 million people, the above quote seems spot on, doesn't it? With 12 million coins already in wallets, there's less than 0.001 coins left for everyone else.

The majority of all the wealth in the world is in the hands of a few, bitcoin is no different.  It seems counter intuitive to think that this problem worsens as adoption increases though.
legendary
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1005
"There's a set amount of wealth that can exist and the majority of it is already concentrated in the hands of a few. If adoption increases, the problem only gets worse." (reddit commenter on bitcoin)

Can someone refute this? If not, I don't want to get into BTC. I like the tech behind BTC transactions. But with 60% of BTC wealth held by maybe 1-5 million people, the above quote seems spot on, doesn't it? With 12 million coins already in wallets, there's less than 0.001 coins left for everyone else.

A set amount of wealth that can exist? Easily refutable. Compare today with 50 years ago. Is the amount of wealth the same? No. Refuted.
legendary
Activity: 952
Merit: 1000
Stagnation is Death
This is where bitcoin failed terribly, hoarders holding large stash and only rich miners or should i say bitcoin bagholders able to mine the rest of them with current difficulty levels. I think alts with no premine are much more fair
sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 251
the hole set amount of wealth thing doesnt really apply to bitcoin though right? because its worth whatever someone is willing to pay for one at that moment?
legendary
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
Also, if you make more than $32,000 per year I hope you do what you can to distribute your wealth to other nations as one of the 1% richest people in the world.

http://www.globalrichlist.com/
legendary
Activity: 3598
Merit: 2386
Viva Ut Vivas
During the last price spike it was shown that the higher the price, the more the wealth is distributed.

Those people with big wallets started selling.

Though if wealth distribution is your thing...Bitcoin is probably not for you. You should stick with currency backed by guns.
sr. member
Activity: 389
Merit: 250
"There's a set amount of wealth that can exist and the majority of it is already concentrated in the hands of a few. If adoption increases, the problem only gets worse." (reddit commenter on bitcoin)

Can someone refute this? If not, I don't want to get into BTC. I like the tech behind BTC transactions. But with 60% of BTC wealth held by maybe 1-5 million people, the above quote seems spot on, doesn't it? With 12 million coins already in wallets, there's less than 0.001 coins left for everyone else.


I don't agree with the math here.  With 12.5 million coins mined, 8.5 million are still left to be mined.  How does that equate to 0.001 for everyone else?

Where do you get that 60% of coins are held by 1 - 5 people?  I don't know the exact thread, but I have seen posts that show the distribution of coins across wallets, and I think the last one I saw was that 47 wallets had more than 10,000 coins.  That doesn't account for people who may hold more than one wallet, but the claim that 1 - 5 people hold 60% of all mined bitcoins isn't accurate.
sr. member
Activity: 910
Merit: 253
What currency/financial system has less % owned by less people?

The answer to that is none. Look at the fiat in your wallet. that currency is already majority owned by the top %.

The difference in crypto is that the people can move purchasing power to other coins almost instantly and that counts as a "electronic vote" to how we want to manage our purchasing power.

sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 251
i think that supply will steadily get more and more spread out. and also with any money there are the elites with a majority of it and there are millions with a small amount. its normal
newbie
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
"There's a set amount of wealth that can exist and the majority of it is already concentrated in the hands of a few. If adoption increases, the problem only gets worse." (reddit commenter on bitcoin)

Can someone refute this? If not, I don't want to get into BTC. I like the tech behind BTC transactions. But with 60% of BTC wealth held by maybe 1-5 million people, the above quote seems spot on, doesn't it? With 12 million coins already in wallets, there's less than 0.001 coins left for everyone else.
Pages:
Jump to: