What do you think about this comment ?

[Denker]

I think this had been discussed several times. First of all I hardly doubt that each address stands for one person. Pools and exchanges had been mentioned.
And of course we have very rich people in Bitcoin.These are either very early adopters and therefore they were very lucky but also deserved as they took the risk to believe in that technology in the super early years or this had been people with cash investing in it (Winklevoss Bros for instance).
I don't have a problem with it. We are still in early times of Bitcoin's growth.Over the years the distribution will spread more.However there will still be big holders/owners of Bitcoin.
But in how far is that different to the concentration of wealth in fiat money or precious metals?
Bitcoin wasn't designed to make everyone having the same wealth.It was created to make us free from the actual financial system.

[sittesreg]

1st, nobody knows the individuals' numbers in the Bitcoin ledger, only bitcoin addresses
2nd, false numbers

check this: http://ondn.net:800/

[AtheistAKASaneBrain]

The people that own lots of Bitcoins deserve them, period. They took a big, big risk by buying something that was near to worthless. They saw the potential before everyone else, they took the risk, and they took the reward. Just don't come crying here again in a decade or two because you didn't took the opportunity to get some coins when they still were 3 figures each.

[rebuilder]

I'm sure it's exchanges and business that account for many of the largest addresses, but it's undeniable that there are some ginormous individual holders.

Assuming it becomes a success what are such people planning to do? They can either sell, which they can only do once. They can spend them which again spreads them far and wide. They can sit on them and then not much happens at all.

The criticism of its distribution is valid but none of the above are particularly spine chilling options.

They could lend them out for a profit, gaining an even larger share of BTC. In fact, any profitable (in BTC terms) use they could find for their coins would have the effect of further centralizing wealth.

If, for any activity, you profit more then you can reasonably spend, you will likely end up accumulating wealth.

[harrymmmm]

Besides, it has been time proven that any wealth distribution always ends up with a certain elite owning more than most of the common people. No matter how you start.

Yep. That's the fact of the matter. The rich always get richer.

So this problem is something worth talking about. It won't just go away.
Unfortunately, the facts are:
1) skewed initial distribution
2) eventual (price) deflation coz limited supply, causing holders to keep holding and getting richer.
3) skewed distribution will only get more skewed as time passes.

I doubt anything can 'fix' this.

If a new country was being started and a new fiat currency was being distributed and there were no rich people outside trying to get in, the new government would have to distribute the new fiat somehow. But they wouldn't just dole it out evenly. They would distribute to people they rationalize as productive ('friends'), and those who provide services in exchange. There would be some sense in that strategy too.
At least with bitcoin, that distribution has been made to nerds, and tbh I'm happier with that idea than with a distribution to political and business friends. I can see why many (most?) would disagree with me tho.

The meritocracy that is open source is likely to produce a different kind of power structure; one that has never been tried before. But it's probably just as corruptible as any previous one

[Slark]

There will only ever be 21 million bitcoins, and there are over 7 billion people in the world already.

If you own even 1 bitcoin, you already own way more than your 'fair share'...  If you took all the bitcoins that currently exist and divided them among all the people in the world equally, there would only be a little more than 0.002 bitcoins per person.

You can't use logic like that. There is probably more people in the world who never used internet to begin with. Most people in so called first world have never heard of bitcoin.
Bitcoin community is rather hermetic by nature.

[jaberwock]

It is unavoidable, because early adopters will always have more power comparated to late adopters, no matter what you do.

It is worse with FIAT or with the Internet

[Kprawn]

Nothing changed with the introduction of the Bitcoin technology... rich people still have buying power and can still own the most coins, if they ever decided to do that. Yes, Bitcoin

distribution can enable micro payments on some services and poor people can enter markets where they were previously be excluded. The financial landlords just gave up a piece

of the rent, to smaller plot owners... but they still have the majority of the collected wealth. {Historical advantage or old money}  ...Bitcoin is still a drop in the ocean of the

entire global wealth.

[Corealz]

The wealth distribution is very uneven in real life too! Some of those old bitcoins may have been lost by eary adopters as well.

[pilscoop]

Don't trust everything you read on the internet, specially if it's on a youtube comment

[cohnhead]

one thing to consider is when wealth is held as fiat, it looses value overtime due to inflation. So the natural incentive is to spend (before you loose purchasing power) or invest to try earn more than the rate inflation.
Bitcoin on the other hand , by its design, theoretically gains value over time. So holding them for perpetuity does not penalize the holder with any loss of value.

[Lover of Coin]

It's still true that wealth disparity in bitcoin isn't good, but it's i think even have 1BTC makes you rich if everyone in this world use bitcoin.

If you own 1 bitcoin in the future, you are one of top 21 million rich person. So please hold and use your bitcoin to make bitcoin popular.

[zimmah]

It's still true that wealth disparity in bitcoin isn't good, but it's i think even have 1BTC makes you rich if everyone in this world use bitcoin.

If you own 1 bitcoin in the future, you are one of top 21 million rich person. So please hold and use your bitcoin to make bitcoin popular.

in reality you're much better off than that because several persons have thousands of bitcoin, leaving even less for the average joe.

Having 1 full bitcoin or more makes you quite rich compared to most others.

$300? it's a steal, even $3000 is way too cheap.

If bitcoin sees any success as a global currency it needs to be several orders of magnitude higher, there just aren't enough whole bitcoins for everyone to have one, and $300 is far too accessible for the average joe.

[ebliever]

Of course bitcoin ownership is concentrated. So was Apple stock when it was a young company. Or anything else early in its life. And that fact is completely meaningless, unless all other wealth in the world magically evaporates. Since people can buy and sell bitcoin freely the fact that a fairly small number of people own most bitcoin at this moment in time has no real significance.

[c789]

It is ridiculous how people are so obsessed with what other people have [cash, pretty wife, Bitcoin, nice car, etc.]

Envy only makes the observer unhappy and it leads to a host of other problems.

[neurotypical]

It's still true that wealth disparity in bitcoin isn't good, but it's i think even have 1BTC makes you rich if everyone in this world use bitcoin.

If you own 1 bitcoin in the future, you are one of top 21 million rich person. So please hold and use your bitcoin to make bitcoin popular.

in reality you're much better off than that because several persons have thousands of bitcoin, leaving even less for the average joe.

Having 1 full bitcoin or more makes you quite rich compared to most others.

$300? it's a steal, even $3000 is way too cheap.

If bitcoin sees any success as a global currency it needs to be several orders of magnitude higher, there just aren't enough whole bitcoins for everyone to have one, and $300 is far too accessible for the average joe.

This a million times. But for some reason, people don't just understand this. They don't have a proper understanding of supply and demand. They can't see how the current marketcap is pathetically low and so is the price, it's microscopic. Wake up people, Bitcoin is cheap at 3 dollars, 300, and 3000. At 30k? Then we are talking something competitive. The opportunities to make mad bank with it are so high it's not even funny.

[Betwrong]

It's still true that wealth disparity in bitcoin isn't good, but it's i think even have 1BTC makes you rich if everyone in this world use bitcoin.

If you own 1 bitcoin in the future, you are one of top 21 million rich person. So please hold and use your bitcoin to make bitcoin popular.

in reality you're much better off than that because several persons have thousands of bitcoin, leaving even less for the average joe.

Having 1 full bitcoin or more makes you quite rich compared to most others.

$300? it's a steal, even $3000 is way too cheap.

If bitcoin sees any success as a global currency it needs to be several orders of magnitude higher, there just aren't enough whole bitcoins for everyone to have one, and $300 is far too accessible for the average joe.

This a million times. But for some reason, people don't just understand this. They don't have a proper understanding of supply and demand. They can't see how the current marketcap is pathetically low and so is the price, it's microscopic. Wake up people, Bitcoin is cheap at 3 dollars, 300, and 3000. At 30k? Then we are talking something competitive. The opportunities to make mad bank with it are so high it's not even funny.

I agree. Now it's just too early for people to understand this. In the future all the people in the world will be using Bitcoin and maybe some other cryptocurrencies because of convenience and maybe some other reasons. It's just the matter of time.

[cohnhead]

Will the halving of the block rewards always have such a great impact on the price of btc..or does the impact of the halving diminish each time as it has less and less effect on the total amount of btc that will become available? I cant imagine btc value would be doubling every 3-4 years for the next 135 years or so.  also cant imagine what happens when that last incremental btc gets produced...what I can imagine there will be a party..and hopefully there will be pizza 

[Lover of Coin]

Will the halving of the block rewards always have such a great impact on the price of btc..or does the impact of the halving diminish each time as it has less and less effect on the total amount of btc that will become available? I cant imagine btc value would be doubling every 3-4 years for the next 135 years or so.  also cant imagine what happens when that last incremental btc gets produced...what I can imagine there will be a party..and hopefully there will be pizza 

After a few more halving, the effect of halving will diminish. The effect of miners' dump will be smaller. The wide adoption of bitcoin is more important.

[lightenx]

Copied something from Business Insider, to get more attention to his channel. But I think he's right.