Will bitcoin change the distribution of wealth in the world?

[iamTom123]

Does anyone have information whether bitcoin would distribute wealth more equally across people than the current wealth distribution? Or would the distribution be even more unfair?

Bitcoin can help in counteracting inequality but to imagine it becoming the driving force to make wealth get redistributed maybe putting unnecessary stress on cryptocurrency...that can just be a hyped expectation. Cryptocurrency is opening us a better and more fair playing field but it will not guarantee that anybody who get into it would be experiencing the same success and financial windfall as the first adopters. Bitcoin can never be a tool for socialism-oriented people, where wealth redistribution can be one of its many goals.

[krauzzer02]

It is just the bridge or the way to distribute fair and neutral wealth to the society and to the people who knows crypto. Central banks, Goverment and any other Authorities in charge for the regulation for the wealth and currency controls and manipulate it for their own selfish reasons like pigs and crocodiles, blockchain technology introduce the freedom and fair way to manage and control your own wealth but the change is always depends to the people.

[krishnapramod]

Does anyone have information whether bitcoin would distribute wealth more equally across people than the current wealth distribution?

Or would the distribution be even more unfair?

Bitcoin is neither equally distributed nor it's going to create a system of fair and equal distribution of wealth. Early adopters do have an advantage and since Bitcoins total supply is limited, economic/income/wealth inequality further creates an uneven distribution of Bitcoin.



https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/owns-bitcoins-infographic-wealth-distribution/

https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses.html

[Supreemo]

It won't change anything. Most of the wealth is in the hands of just 1% of the population. How do you imagine this money is going to be distributed among the people? Bitcoin is nothing more but a tool, just like a gun or a knife. It won't do anything by itself, it needs people to operate it the right way. The only way for people to destroy a corporation and make it lose all its money is to stop buying its products. 

,i partly agree with you, anyway lets say giving wealth or money, does it really necessary or would those wealthy personalities agree with it? Of course not. bitcoin is a digital currency, or in other words its money, and the fact that we cannot stop buying what we need from those people who produced our needs, same also as they do, so its not distributed properly, but in fact that money is just circulating,

[Mometaskers]

Wealth distribution is in a hand of people,but limiting influance of greedy financial institutions,central banks,big corporation may equal chances and improve economic situation of people living in poor areas.But without people solidarity it cant be done

Even without this though, it would be somewhat not easy for the poor to get their hands on bitcoins so I think there would still be some level of inequality. But as you said, if it's not the greedy bankers and politicians, there are greater chances it would be redistributed.

Just looking around the forums I've seen enough number of people wanting to use bitcoins to donate money. If only the fees were not this high, you can imagine they've already sent thousands of dollars collectively.

[SirLancelot]

Bitcoin, of course, is more transparent and fairer. 90% of the wealth of the entity is basically in the hands of 1% wealthy people, and basically monopoly of the industry. Bitcoin is definitely not.

There is hardly any reason to deny this fact that most of the wealth is owned by only a few percentage of people. But it is very much expected that bitcoin after sometime manage to change this trend. Bitcoin is very much capable of making anyone rich. Moreover, there are so many unemployed who are earning from bitcoin now. Time is not too far when most of the wealth will be owned by majority of the population.

[Getcoinsite]

Does anyone have information whether bitcoin would distribute wealth more equally across people than the current wealth distribution?

Or would the distribution be even more unfair?

not just bitcoin but the cryptocurrencies as well.the blockchain will not only change the distribution of wealth but the distribution of all financial aspect..coz this is the alternative way of aerning in the whole world.

[Lancusters]

Bitcoin, of course, is more transparent and fairer. 90% of the wealth of the entity is basically in the hands of 1% wealthy people, and basically monopoly of the industry. Bitcoin is definitely not.

There is hardly any reason to deny this fact that most of the wealth is owned by only a few percentage of people. But it is very much expected that bitcoin after sometime manage to change this trend. Bitcoin is very much capable of making anyone rich. Moreover, there are so many unemployed who are earning from bitcoin now. Time is not too far when most of the wealth will be owned by majority of the population.

It seems to me that you are mistaken. Nobody knows how many bitcoins are now concentrated in the hands of whales. They have a large impact on the market of bitcoins and so you can easily manipulate the price. For poor people their savings in bitcoin is very valuable and therefore, when whales of lower prices in the market, they panic and sell their bitcoins. This leads to the fact that the whales concentrate even more bitcoins in their accounts. Where there is money can not be equal distribution.

[Almat]

Not really. You have to take into account the fact that rich people can get richer in Bitcoin quicker. There will be plenty of new rich people though, with the number of early adopters.

[sofi@]

It will depends on the people not bitcoin because bitcoin only offers opportunity for earnings its up to people who join the market to earn bitcoin the reality is that if you have more to invest then you probably has the higher chance to become rich but if a person is haeworking even if he does not have so much money to invest he can become rich thru bitcoin

[Lieldoryn]

Not really. You have to take into account the fact that rich people can get richer in Bitcoin quicker. There will be plenty of new rich people though, with the number of early adopters.

Rich people can have control over a large number of bitcoins. They raise the price and then sell your coins increasing his fortune several times. When the poor maintain their bitcoins to earn they can stay with a set of numbers on the wallets ktorory will not cost anything.

[Mpamaegbu]

Does anyone have information whether bitcoin would distribute wealth more equally across people than the current wealth distribution?

Or would the distribution be even more unfair?

Certainly, yes. I believe that Bitcoin will change the world distribution of wealth but I do not think it can be evenly done. Now, with Bitcoin, youngsters who follow the trend do come into wealth through their investment in Bitcoin, exposing them to this opportunity that they wouldn't have had. The story of the 12-year old who became rich after he invested his $1000 birthday gift from his granny into Bitcoin is a classical example.

Of making wealth distribution equal is an unachievable goal. No technology can achieve that.

[Aamir1]

The distribution of wealth of the world has nothing to do with Bitcoin. Bitcoin is just an asset that can be bought, and for buying something, you need money, so basically, only the people with wealth can access Bitcoin, unless someone without wealth has skills to earn it, but if someone can earn Bitcoins, he earn real money as well and he can't be categorized as a poor person.
Bitcoin is just a new face of keeping money. Unlike other third-parties, you are keeping your money within your own reach, but safe, that is what Bitcoin is all about. And, Bitcoin is a kind of money as well, and those who are wealthy can have it, and others, they can only be where they are.

[BobK71]

Does anyone have information whether bitcoin would distribute wealth more equally across people than the current wealth distribution?

Or would the distribution be even more unfair?

I guess I'll propose a 2-part answer that depends on what we mean by the 'success of Bitcoin.'

Success could mean (1) Bitcoin becomes the dominant form of currency in the world, or large parts of the world; or (2) Bitcoin becomes a major store of value that is traded at high value in fiat currency terms but is not used much for transactions.

For both scenarios, Bitcoin should have a fundamentally beneficial effect on inequality.

Scenario (1) is frankly not likely -- technical issues aside, as Jamie Dimon said, governments are just not going to let a non-state-controlled money take over.  Scenario (2) is looking more and more like where we're headed, where (at least Western) central banks will let Bitcoin go very high and then 'manage' the fiat-BTC exchange rate as a means to support confidence in their fiat money and stabilize the system.

As for the effect on inequality, we first have to understand where the extreme inequality of recent decades, and the inequality of the modern world in general, come from.  The current trend comes from central banks being forced to inflate the values of financial assets to make a small no. of people rich, and hoping that their spending will keep the world afloat, or at least that their spending won't collapse and bring the world down with it.  This is also an extreme-case microcosm of the modern system in general.

The reason this inequality drives even more inequality is that this is an unstable situation.  Spending by the lucky on frivolous luxuries can disappear quickly when the stock market goes down a little, for example.  So central banks must pump more money into the system, even though doing so will only increase the inequality and thus instability!  Asset inflation has become an addiction that can only end in disaster, but that you can't stop either.

With scenario (2) in place, the central banks will be able to, basically, bring about a reset of the entire system.  By owning a lot of Bitcoin and 'managing' the exchange rate, they will be back in a more powerful position where monetary and fiscal policies will have more freedom to rescue the system even if the lucky decide to cut back spending.  The asset inflation can stop, and asset markets will be freer.  In the long run, there's really no alternative.

[Wagako]

I dont know, and bitcoin can not do it because wealth has already been distributed, only because bitcoin exists doesnt mean that it can make rich everybody, or that a lot of people can be wealth after it pumps to $100k.
And this has already been asked so many times, i am starting to get tired of those kind of threads that are only for spamming purposes.
But no, nobody knows what is going to happen, just try to predict it, it is impossible.

Yes we didnt know what happened but the only thing we need to do is to believe that bitcoin will help a lot of people to become rich.

[Basmic]

I dont know, and bitcoin can not do it because wealth has already been distributed, only because bitcoin exists doesnt mean that it can make rich everybody, or that a lot of people can be wealth after it pumps to $100k.
And this has already been asked so many times, i am starting to get tired of those kind of threads that are only for spamming purposes.
But no, nobody knows what is going to happen, just try to predict it, it is impossible.

Yes we didnt know what happened but the only thing we need to do is to believe that bitcoin will help a lot of people to become rich.

Bitcoin does not make the poor people rich. It seems to me that it is not possible. But bitcoin can make those who are willing to work more secure. You can afford to make more purchases but a millionaire you will not become. If you store your bitcoins until he will cost a million dollars then you should not wait and lose everything.

[tomahawk9]

Not really. You have to take into account the fact that rich people can get richer in Bitcoin quicker. There will be plenty of new rich people though, with the number of early adopters.

Rich people can have control over a large number of bitcoins. They raise the price and then sell your coins increasing his fortune several times. When the poor maintain their bitcoins to earn they can stay with a set of numbers on the wallets ktorory will not cost anything.

Exactly. Rich people can also manipulate the market and get bigger profits, but the early adopters that started with just a few dollars in their btc invesment, in the long term, they will get rich because that's the beauty of cryptocurrency, the rich won't have absolute control on the price and while they get richer, others will as well and everybody wins (not just the 1%), that's that's the power of a decentralized entity as bitcoin.

To answer OP's question, If we're talking about going against the system that keeps the 1% from getting richer and richer, then bitcoin might be the solution as the distribution of wealth won't have a centrilized entity, but it's very unlikely to happen due to implication of having the govt without control over money would be terrible. If we're talking about fighting wealth inequality around the world, then no, bitcoin won't be of much help in that regard. Besides, that's not the purpose of bitcoin and it's technology.

[beerlover]

It is just the bridge or the way to distribute fair and neutral wealth to the society and to the people who knows crypto. Central banks, Goverment and any other Authorities in charge for the regulation for the wealth and currency controls and manipulate it for their own selfish reasons like pigs and crocodiles, blockchain technology introduce the freedom and fair way to manage and control your own wealth but the change is always depends to the people.

Fair and neutral wealth to people who got to know crypto first, going with the trend further… The earlier you adopt it, the better.

It doesn’t have to be fair. We cannot expect to have equal distribution of wealth and that was not the main plan. The essence was to have a decentralized currency so as to take away the control from the government and banks.

Those who believed in it and took the risk are already made and nothing anyone can do about it, whoever is in it now and is taking the best advantage of it, will definitely not be compared to someone who comes in the next two years and so on.

[TheUltraElite]

Does anyone have information whether bitcoin would distribute wealth more equally across people than the current wealth distribution?

Or would the distribution be even more unfair?

This has been widely discussed previously and honestly wealth has no fair distribution and the rich always get rich and the poor remain poor. Now cryptocurrencies cannot change this in any aspect. Both rich and a poor person can invest money into bitcoin and other altcoins and get rich but the gain will be proportional to the capital invested into the crypto. Hence the profit even if both gain, will maintain the difference between their economic status. Thus reiterating the fact that the rich will continue to remain rich and the poor continue to remain poor.

[ThunderCatSteve]

Not really. You have to take into account the fact that rich people can get richer in Bitcoin quicker. There will be plenty of new rich people though, with the number of early adopters.

Rich people can have control over a large number of bitcoins. They raise the price and then sell your coins increasing his fortune several times. When the poor maintain their bitcoins to earn they can stay with a set of numbers on the wallets ktorory will not cost anything.

There is no way we can doubt that. Some of them are just solo, without much noise. It would not have taken them anything, to find a way to blend in knowing it is definitely worth the risk and most especially they are in a position to know if something will end up working or not and once they get a hold of that, they step in pretty fast.

So many of them are still going to come in and the poor will definitely just have to dig the scratch and find how they can enhance themselves better than someone else eventually.