Does Bitcoin’s fixed supply cap create inequality over time?

[N9_Ninja]

It’s not really about inequality. Early users took big risks when Bitcoin was just an experiment, so they deserve the upside. The supply cap just keeps the rules fair — no one can print more coins. Everyone still plays by the same system.

[alastantiger]

Those who acquired bitcoin in early days got larger share in less price. Later when there are very less bitcoins left to be mined and prices are astronomically high, it will be hard to acquire even fractions of bitcoins. Where is equality concept associated with bitcoin then ?

The equality is that we all have the opportunity to acquire Bitcoin now that's less expensive but many people are still doubting that Bitcoin Is authentic and some are calling it a scam. They should have used this time to be accumulating instead of doubting but because they have been brainwashed by the government, they don't want to believe that anything that isn't under the control of the government can be authentic. Having fixed supply is what makes Bitcoin perfect, it means Bitcoin can't be manipulated for the gains of those in power unlike how new fiats are being printed into the economy to strengthen it when things aren't going well.

For Bitcoin now, any amount you can accumulate, will retain it's value and also add more value as more people are investing. Unlimited supply of a currency devalues the currency and we can see this with every other currency including some of the cryptocurrency being invented presently.

[Graph001]

Those who acquired bitcoin in early days got larger share in less price. Later when there are very less bitcoins left to be mined and prices are astronomically high, it will be hard to acquire even fractions of bitcoins. Where is equality concept associated with bitcoin then ?

You are of course right that Bitcoin is not equal because early investors were able to make a profit with a small investment and now people are spending thousands for a small fraction. Those who support Bitcoin say it is equal because the rules are the same for everyone and anyone can buy it. But it is not possible to have equal access or equal opportunities like before. Time is of the essence because the early risk takers have received huge rewards. The advantage of Bitcoin is that no one can take control of the system or print additional coins. It does not solve inequality in the least and may actually make it worse.

[Betwrong]

~ Therefore, for those who want to get rich quickly, owning bitcoin these days is too late because the era of getting rich quick with bitcoin is over.

Mate, these words have been said so many times already! For the first time when BTC reached $1. Then when BTC surpassed $1,000 and then when it surpassed $20k. There were always those saying "It's the highest point bitcoin can reach." The thing is that we don't know.

~
Please note, I said the get rich quick era with bitcoin is over, I did not say bitcoin has peaked and there is no more upside potential. These two things are different.

I get it. I apologize for understanding you wrongly. If you think that BTC still has the potential of growing, I'm with you here totally.

Back to the topic, yes and no, because most of the early adopters cashed out their BTC at much lower prices than we can even imagine.

But today, rich people, people with a lot of money can easily buy a lot of bitcoins while many poor people have lost the ability to buy bitcoins at current prices. That means inequality will increase.

This is what I could never understand. The price of BTC today is not that as it used to be, but you can always buy 0.001, right, and if, like you said, it's not peaking these days, then the profit on this investment is still could be made.

[fikrett]

It’s not really about inequality. Early users took big risks when Bitcoin was just an experiment, so they deserve the upside. The supply cap just keeps the rules fair — no one can print more coins. Everyone still plays by the same system.

Yep. Everybody can still buy BTC, but the amount would be smaller, that's the gist of it.

It's about who understands for what BTC truly stands for and why it is alive even today.

[Pablo-wood]

Those who acquired bitcoin in early days got larger share in less price. Later when there are very less bitcoins left to be mined and prices are astronomically high, it will be hard to acquire even fractions of bitcoins. Where is equality concept associated with bitcoin then ?

Even if the price eventually skyrockets to $1m people will still afford to buy based on their financial capacity. Yes the quantity for a smaller amount will obviously be relatively minute but the fact remains it won't go beyond reach for small and average investors. As for the equality, just as we can't get equality in our financial levels, same thing is applicable to investment generally not just in Bitcoin alone, the only remedy is to join the trend now so we don't become the victims when the price are astronomically high

[Pmalek]

@charrles
Nothing stopped you from buying or even mining bitcoin back in 2009 or 2010. Not having heard of Bitcoin or not being interested in it at the time, doesn't mean there was inequality. An unfair system would be one that allowed a certain group to acquire or mine bitcoin while at the same time preventing other people from doing it. That never happened. There was also no premine, mined in secret with the goal of enriching certain people. Everyone began at equal terms. 

[endut15]

Honestly, I don’t think it’s about equality at all. People who bought Bitcoin early took a huge risk when nobody believed in it — so it’s fair that they ended up with bigger gains.
That’s how every new technology works: early users always get rewarded more.

Bitcoin doesn’t really promise equal wealth, it just gives everyone the same rules — no one can print extra coins or change the supply.
Even now, people can still earn BTC through trading, working for crypto, or using DeFi platforms.

In the end, it’s not about “equal share”, it’s about equal opportunity. The rest depends on how early and how smart you play it.

[BALIK]

But today, rich people, people with a lot of money can easily buy a lot of bitcoins while many poor people have lost the ability to buy bitcoins at current prices. That means inequality will increase.

This is what I could never understand. The price of BTC today is not that as it used to be, but you can always buy 0.001, right, and if, like you said, it's not peaking these days, then the profit on this investment is still could be made.

Poor people can also own bitcoin with any amount they have, they can even own less than 0.01 BTC and they can still make profit from bitcoin. But the profit of owning 0.01 BTC will be very small compared to those who own 1BCT or 100BTC (rich people). Therefore, not only does bitcoin not solve the problem, it also contributes to increasing global inequality over time.

Bitcoin is considered to be the fairest asset but the problem is not everyone is lucky enough to get early access, and when its price rises, not everyone can afford to buy the same amount. Therefore, it cannot improve equality in current society.

In my opinion, any asset that increases in price over time increases inequality because not everyone has the opportunity to know early or can hold it for the long term.

[Betwrong]

But today, rich people, people with a lot of money can easily buy a lot of bitcoins while many poor people have lost the ability to buy bitcoins at current prices. That means inequality will increase.

This is what I could never understand. The price of BTC today is not that as it used to be, but you can always buy 0.001, right, and if, like you said, it's not peaking these days, then the profit on this investment is still could be made.

Poor people can also own bitcoin with any amount they have, they can even own less than 0.01 BTC and they can still make profit from bitcoin. But the profit of owning 0.01 BTC will be very small compared to those who own 1BCT or 100BTC (rich people). Therefore, not only does bitcoin not solve the problem, it also contributes to increasing global inequality over time.
~

Look, I'm sorry but what you are saying looks like communist propaganda to me, which I hate. Maybe you didn't meat it that way, I can imagine that, but to me it looks like that. Bitcoin is a great thing. Maybe one of the the greatest things that ever happened to humanity, and , let's not regret that BTC is not what it's never meant to be - the equalizer of sorts.

[avp2306]

But today, rich people, people with a lot of money can easily buy a lot of bitcoins while many poor people have lost the ability to buy bitcoins at current prices. That means inequality will increase.

This is what I could never understand. The price of BTC today is not that as it used to be, but you can always buy 0.001, right, and if, like you said, it's not peaking these days, then the profit on this investment is still could be made.

Poor people can also own bitcoin with any amount they have, they can even own less than 0.01 BTC and they can still make profit from bitcoin. But the profit of owning 0.01 BTC will be very small compared to those who own 1BCT or 100BTC (rich people). Therefore, not only does bitcoin not solve the problem, it also contributes to increasing global inequality over time.
~

Look, I'm sorry but what you are saying looks like communist propaganda to me, which I hate. Maybe you didn't meat it that way, I can imagine that, but to me it looks like that. Bitcoin is a great thing. Maybe one of the the greatest things that ever happened to humanity, and , let's not regret that BTC is not what it's never meant to be - the equalizer of sorts.

But I really don't get it why they need to compare rich and poor while the fact there's nothing equal in this world. Rich people always have advantage but that's not the end of everything since those have few can still do something to increase their accumulated volume if they are really eager to invest more in Bitcoin.

I think its better not to compare the capability of poor and rich since they will just get stressed on unnecessary matter. Also there's nothing mentioned that Bitcoin is created to solve economic inequality and maybe they need to settle up their expectation since its better to compete yourself then became more better invest each days pass.

[Mate2237]

Snip

Snip.

Poor people can also own bitcoin with any amount they have, they can even own less than 0.01 BTC and they can still make profit from bitcoin. But the profit of owning 0.01 BTC will be very small compared to those who own 1BCT or 100BTC (rich people). Therefore, not only does bitcoin not solve the problem, it also contributes to increasing global inequality over time.

Bitcoin is considered to be the fairest asset but the problem is not everyone is lucky enough to get early access, and when its price rises, not everyone can afford to buy the same amount. Therefore, it cannot improve equality in current society.

In my opinion, any asset that increases in price over time increases inequality because not everyone has the opportunity to know early or can hold it for the long term.

Instead of trying to compare the profit of the poor and that of the wealthy, it's important that people should give attention to accumulating Bitcoin knowing that no matter the amount of Bitcoin an individual invest in profits is certain. There is no need of trying to compare what can't change because it's obvious that the poor and rich don't have thesame level of opportunities because the rich has more purchasing power than the poor.



Giving attention to seeing that one has a Bitcoin asset is what should be prioritized over unnecessary comparison. The poor who may not be financially stable should not see their financial status as a barrier when it comes to Bitcoin investment but should look beyond their economic situation when investing.

[₿itcoin]

Those who acquired bitcoin in early days got larger share in less price. Later when there are very less bitcoins left to be mined and prices are astronomically high, it will be hard to acquire even fractions of bitcoins. Where is equality concept associated with bitcoin then ?

In my opinion, Bitcoins fixed supply units can actually create a problem of wealth accumulation.. But its not really losing equality, its exposing inequality.

Early adopters bought Bitcoins very cheaply &  now they are holding onto a huge chunk of it,, thats a fact. so this fixed supply &  initial accumulation can increase inequality &  it is not possible to reduce it. But consider the flip side, Bitcoins protocols provide equal opportunity for all, ensure infinite transparency &  act as a way to escape the inflation of fiat money. This scarcity is the same for everyone, its not just for those who were active at the beginning. the key question is, Do you act now or do you wait &  move out when the price rises?

[OsaiEmma]

Those who acquired bitcoin in early days got larger share in less price. Later when there are very less bitcoins left to be mined and prices are astronomically high, it will be hard to acquire even fractions of bitcoins. Where is equality concept associated with bitcoin then ?

Mm the concept of equality in terms of creating same financial level for all is impossible, even if the price of Bitcoin doesn't ever change, it will still be impossible to have financial equality, cause, if let's say we have 1 billion TS of Bitcoin today, and we have 1 million people willing to buy, that is 1k BTC per person right, but there are people right that will be willing and able to buy more than 100k Bitcoin, there will also be people who will be willing to buy but not able to buy even the 1k BTC, some might just be able to afford 1 some .5btc some 100btc some 10k BTC e.t.c, so it's almost impossible to.

The only good thing right now is, at every point in time, there is always a discounted price for us to buy, and at whatsoever quantity we can, so yeah

[EarnOnVictor]

Those who acquired bitcoin in early days got larger share in less price. Later when there are very less bitcoins left to be mined and prices are astronomically high, it will be hard to acquire even fractions of bitcoins. Where is equality concept associated with bitcoin then ?

I think I saw a similar question about a month ago. You see, kudos to those who believed in Bitcoin at the early times, and used their money to buy/risk it. They are the true heroes/heroines of Bitcoin. So if Bitcoin now rewards them for that, so what? That's my philosophy about this.

However, you are mistaken if you think Bitcoin promised equality in that regard, it never did, and nothing can. It's pure economic and world's inequality playing out here. If you buy more, you gain more, period! The rich will always be richer, for they can buy more assets, and it also depends on how much you are willing to buy through risk-taking.

Where equality comes in is that when you own your Bitcoin, you have every right to it. Not that you can't spend it where another countries national could. It makes sure of that till today, especially in the crossborder payments, and I love it.

[aylabadia05]

Those who acquired bitcoin in early days got larger share in less price. Later when there are very less bitcoins left to be mined and prices are astronomically high, it will be hard to acquire even fractions of bitcoins. Where is equality concept associated with bitcoin then ?

The price of Bitcoin four or five years ago is clearly different from the price of Bitcoin this year, and I don't think it's the same way to measure equivalence.
Perhaps the analogy of buying land made by someone on this topic explains why I say equivalence isn't measured by price.

I understand why you'd measure equivalence by the current purchase price versus the purchase price when Bitcoin was scarce. People who bought at a certain price will receive a very high return when they sell at a certain price when Bitcoin is scarce.
Bitcoin is a currency system, and people who owned Bitcoin at a low price and those who owned Bitcoin at a high price are still paying the same amount.