It isn`t so simple. Banks are the responsible for creating paper money, they can speculate, they can print more and more, so, actually, paper money, dollars, as you mention, are under bank`s control. Regarding crypto, that is precisely the change that is happening here: this is not "money" as we all have known it for centuries, but a transaction system called Blockchain and based on the trust of many. Banks are supposed to be the third part, in the blockchain there is not such a third part but many people mining and confirming transactions.
Besides, there are in the world, probably, few with a lot of BTC in their hands. That means exactly the same you are against for. There will be always few people with a lot of power and many with none. This is not about money, but the economy.
I believe in decentralized money, as you. But I can`t see this how you do. For now, it`s already happening: there are bitcoin holders, millionaires, even billionaires, and there are many people with just a tiny amount.
Decentralized money is not going to solve the inequality problem. This is just caused by human greed, and, to me, there is not a vaccine for that. Decentralized money just erases the bank, erase this third part, and allows money to move freely. But it does not mean money is going to be equally shared.
Firstly, i agree that banks do print or at least take the task of printing and get it done from a third-party, but do let me tell you that a bank cannot just simply go on printing as many paper money as they desire to. There's a proper system to all this. Printing allots of currency without any proper check will bring about inflation.
Secondly, its very true that decentralization is not going to bring equality as it appears to be theoretically. Obviously, there will always be a certain group of people who will have more than others. Be it centralized or decentralized, someone will have more than others. And the other thing is that in a centralized system, at least we have an authority to which we can complain, ask questions, get queries solved, put blame on. But in a decentralized system, suppose someone owns a fairly larger stake than others, they certainly can manipulate the pricing and the graphs. And in this case we won't be able to complain to anyone, nor will we be able to march against the person because that would make no sense.
Centralisation does bring a check on the freedom we have on our money, but it also helps keep the whole situation under control and kind of stable.
If we see bitcoins for instance, how often do we see it stable? Not very frequent right!
Whereas the centralized part of monetization is fairly stable. Both have their own perks, and what we need is the correct balance and not the abolishment of one and implementation of the other.