True story.
I think the problem comes from the fact that "money makes money", but "more money, makes proportionally even more money".

You pick 1000 people with 1000€ each
You pick one guy with 1M€
let them invest etc...
after X years, the guy that started with 1M€ has more.

I think this is true even if all used the same investing strategies, because in our world, liquidity worths money.

Another way easier to understand:
You deposit 1000€ in a savings account, you get, e.g. 2% interest.
you deposit 1M€ in a savings account, you get, e.g. 5% interest.
After one year (simplifying) those 1000 people get 1020000€ and the single guy 1050000€.

Is that fair?

És arrogante e otário. O que tem o icon que ver com saber código?
Tu também não alteraste coisas que devias, essas sim, dentro do código (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=524124.msg7325685#msg7325685)

Deixa adivinhar: "porque eles [cryptoescudo] não sabiam ler o código e só queriam enganar otários"

E mete o código no github, depois talvez te diga onde estão os erros.

Firstly, post your code at github.

Next: OMG, this coin is filled with mistakes! This dev is just another wanabe!
It has loads of stuff forgotten from litecoin.
As it is, it does not work at all! LOL
Try to move your 225Million coins to another wallet. No node will accept that!

Onde está o Git deste crypto escudo? Como querem que se confie no que quer que seja sem o git disto? Tanto no site oficial, como nesta thread, não é mencionado em lado nenhum.

Além do mais, premine vai contra todos os principios de qualquer moeda - centraliza as coisas. Basicamente metade da moeda tornou-se centralizada. E pedir IDs das pessoas :O  é de caír o queixo. Hã?? IDs? Sem autoridade, + centralização, suseptível de fraude fácil...(podia continuar).

Esta moeda é lixo autêntico. Quem quiser minar, que mine, mas aconselho veementemente a não comprarem disso.

Look, the list cant be stored within a server! That would break the uncentralized nature of your coin!
Moreover iy would be a weak spot. If the server gets hacked, a particular address could be added to the list.
the server-backed list also has one problem: How do you know if a old transfer is valid or not? You would need the list which was valid by the time of the transfer, but using the server you either store thwm all, or you cant!

This is all easily solved in the following way: the list lies within the code (it does not need to be updated on a daily basis! Thats too much!) From time to time (lets say, every N blocks) a full list is commited to the blockchain, and is considered as the valid list until the next commit.
This way the system stays +- distributed and you can confirm all blocks since genesis, because you can see the list that got commited in the blockchain.

Regarding taxes etx.. just forget about that.
Im willing to contribute to your project.  May I PM you?

I got your idea! Seems good. But hard-code the list on the source-code.

Just wanted to answer this:

As I stated, people select which country to pay taxes to. So, If someone wants to send their money to a corrupt country, what should we say about that? If you live in a given honest country, you would certainly select it as a receiver of the taxes.
Anyway, charity seems a pretty good aim, and there should be no problem in adding countries there alongside with charity institutions, so that anyone can chose where to send money.

Moreover, instead of just giving all the 2% to one entity, anyone could select how to distribute contributions over a set of addresses.
Imagine (relative to the 2%):
  80% -> charity
  15% -> Portugal
   5% ->  France

After writing this up, I approve your idea even strongly! And if you "sell" your idea alongside with the possibility to pay taxes, I think It has a strong possibility to be accepted by countries,where bitcoin does not.

Firstly, I want to express that the concept is interesting...however..

Everyday I get sicker from all the new coins that pop like mushrooms...its amazing the amount of altcoins people are creating, just to be in the front-line of some "new" movement that seems different from all the others.

For me, the underlying "feature" of your coin is the following: taxes. I agree that there should some kind of tax mechanism on these coins, but not only I have no clue about how to implement that in a reasonable way, as I also know that your suggestion fails (because I already thought about that one - it was probably the first hypothesis that I raised).

First, realize that what you thought of can easily be done over bitcoin. There is no super-special-stunt required to technically implement the transfer of funds to a given address - let me stick to you on this one - a charity institution address.

The real questions are not technical, are the "high-level" questions that are independent of a particular implementation.

So you propose a % of every transaction. hmm, thats fishy. Every transaction is taxed, so, even if you just transfer funds between two addresses you own, these are taxed. This is not a real problem - people would just avoid transferring funds between addresses.

Now lets begin with the weaker point: how do you define an address to be eligible to receive tax funds?
 - a pre-agreed list of addresses, at every X blocks?
 - each node chooses a list of addresses (for local charity institutions)?

Well, on all these hypothesis, there could be some sort of lobbying. Definitely not good!
This puts your "charity" method quite fragile, but I surely encourage you to challenge me, because I love a good discussion.

What I would suggest is to pay those taxes to countries, where each country publishes a state-owned address. But still, some problems persist.

Lets think about the following: A person makes a transaction. To which country would the taxes go?
Few options here:
 - A random address from one of the ~200 countries OR all the 200 addresses (mathematically the same, leads to equally distributed taxes)
 - A country address specified by the payer or payee.

This is a question hard to answer, but I guess I would go for the second option, as the first one would benefit small (population) countries. For instance, for each transaction, china would receive the same amount of money as Luxembourg, which yields a lower contribution per capita.

The second one would even have an interesting feature, as it would allow someone in Norway to pay taxes to Nigeria, or something similar.

As a bottom-line, I advise you to forget about technical stuff, and start by thinking about the real questions.

What is your oppinion over my arguments, aidcoins?

Not saying that they will not deliver...but borrowing money for such a risky investment..seems...risky?