Is Bitcoin failing?

[2tights]

Does this mean that we won't see a more even distribution of wealth?

http://bitcoinexaminer.org/wealth-distribution-fiat-currency-vs-btc-infographic/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed


The people with the most existing resources will be able to secure the most BTC through mining. How will BTC resist the concentration of wealth?

[1715044932]

1715044932

[1715044932]

1715044932

[1715044932]

1715044932

[Ibian]

Why does wealth need to be distributed?

[minerva]

Why does wealth need to be distributed?

An-caps versus An-socs. Go go go.

[Ibian]

Why does wealth need to be distributed?

An-caps versus An-socs. Go go go.

Yeah it'l be another one of those. Still the question is interesting. Wealth not being evenly distributed is commonly seen as a problem and nobody really challenges it. Let's see where we can go with that.

[xdigital]

Keep in mind: Bitcoin is not designed to fix the problem on wealth distribution.

[Ibian]

Keep in mind: Bitcoin is not designed to fix the problem on wealth distribution.

This has always been my first thought whenever the topic is brought up. Which is what makes me wonder why it does keep being brought up.

[buzybit]

Keep in mind: Bitcoin is not designed to fix the problem on wealth distribution.

right!
please i want to see a debate on this! i am very curious

[bythesea]

Sorry what, I missed the point?

[El Dude]

this is where Litecoin wins as there are still 50 + million coins left to be mined.

[skivrmt]

Keep in mind: Bitcoin is not designed to fix the problem on wealth distribution.

Exactly this.  People who mined early in the CA gold rush made money, everyone else who followed basically didn't.  People who bought Apple early made A LOT of money.  People who bought later made some money. 

Why does the world need to be equal?  Some people are smarter.  Some people are luckier.  Some people work harder than others.  Some are both, all, neither.

Bitcoin solves a lot of issues which people, and merchants, were looking for.  That's all.  It's not set up to be a charity.

[johnyj]

This chart is very wrong, almost 99% of all the fiat money belongs to federal reserve banks, which is privately owned

[toast]

Does this mean that we won't see a more even distribution of wealth?

http://bitcoinexaminer.org/wealth-distribution-fiat-currency-vs-btc-infographic/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed


The people with the most existing resources will be able to secure the most BTC through mining. How will BTC resist the concentration of wealth?

Holy shit, has got to be the worst "deceiving but still technically correct" chart I have seen yet

Why the fuck wouldn't you use the same amounts for the different areas?

"Oh because we like wanted to show how the top 0.001 of fiat is roughly the same size as the top 0.004 of BTC lol"
Shut up, that's not how people's brains work. Make the categories the same so people can compare the sizes.

[skivrmt]

Does this mean that we won't see a more even distribution of wealth?

http://bitcoinexaminer.org/wealth-distribution-fiat-currency-vs-btc-infographic/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed


The people with the most existing resources will be able to secure the most BTC through mining. How will BTC resist the concentration of wealth?

Holy shit, has got to be the worst "deceiving but still technically correct" chart I have seen yet

Why the fuck wouldn't you use the same amounts for the different areas?

"Oh because we like wanted to show how the top 0.001 of fiat is roughly the same size as the top 0.004 of BTC lol"
Shut up, that's not how people's brains work. Make the categories the same so people can compare the sizes.

Selective Reporting is the fancy name.  Fudging the data is more of the informal word for this.  People can manipulate statistics to their liking in almost anyway they choose.  They aren't lying per say, just presenting it in a fashion that proves their point.

[Loki8]

Why does wealth need to be distributed?

Because countries that have reduced poverty and income inequality are civilized countries!

The United States has such an unequal distribution of wealth so that it's in the league of corrupt underdeveloped countries, no longer in the league of the developed nations, according to the latest edition of the world's most thorough study of wealth-distribution.

[Ibian]

Why does wealth need to be distributed?

Because countries that have reduced poverty and income inequality are civilized countries!

The United States has such an unequal distribution of wealth so that it's in the league of corrupt underdeveloped countries, no longer in the league of the developed nations, according to the latest edition of the world's most thorough study of wealth-distribution.

Maybe I wasn't clear. What I meant was, explain, in practical terms, how a more even distribution of wealth will benefit the economy. Additionally, explain how it could happen without confiscations at gunpoint.

[Loki8]

Why does wealth need to be distributed?

Because countries that have reduced poverty and income inequality are civilized countries!

The United States has such an unequal distribution of wealth so that it's in the league of corrupt underdeveloped countries, no longer in the league of the developed nations, according to the latest edition of the world's most thorough study of wealth-distribution.

Maybe I wasn't clear. What I meant was, explain, in practical terms, how a more even distribution of wealth will benefit the economy. Additionally, explain how it could happen without confiscations at gunpoint.

Cutlure and social cohesion are as important as economy.

According to Wikipedia:

Among the effects of inequality researchers have found include higher rates of health and social problems, and lower rates of social goods, a lower level of economic utility in society from resources devoted on high-end consumption, and even a lower level of economic growth when human capital is neglected for high-end consumption.

2013 Economics Nobel prize winner Robert J. Shiller said that rising inequality in the United States and elsewhere is the most important problem. Increasing inequality harms economic growth. High and persistent unemployment, in which inequality increases, has a negative effect on subsequent long-run economic growth. Unemployment can harm growth not only because it is a waste of resources, but also because it generates redistributive pressures and subsequent distortions, drives people to poverty, constrains liquidity limiting labor mobility, and erodes self-esteem promoting social dislocation, unrest and conflict. Policies aiming at controlling unemployment and in particular at reducing its inequality-associated effects support economic growth.

Health and social cohesion

British researchers Richard G. Wilkinson and Kate Pickett have found higher rates of health and social problems (obesity, mental illness, homicides, teenage births, incarceration, child conflict, drug use), and lower rates of social goods (life expectancy, educational performance, trust among strangers, women's status, social mobility, even numbers of patents issued) in countries and states with higher inequality. Using statistics from 23 developed countries and the 50 states of the US, they found social/health problems lower in countries like Japan and Finland and states like Utah and New Hampshire with high levels of equality, than in countries (US and UK) and states (Mississippi and New York) with large differences in household income.

Social cohesion

Research has shown an inverse link between income inequality and social cohesion. In more equal societies, people are much more likely to trust each other, measures of social capital (the benefits of goodwill, fellowship, mutual sympathy and social connectedness among groups who make up a social units) suggest greater community involvement, and homicide rates are consistently lower.

Crime

Crime rate has also been shown to be correlated with inequality in society. Most studies looking into the relationship have concentrated on homicides – since homicides are almost identically defined across all nations and jurisdictions. There have been over fifty studies showing tendencies for violence to be more common in societies where income differences are larger. Research has been conducted comparing developed countries with undeveloped countries, as well as studying areas within countries. Daly et al. 2001 found that among U.S States and Canadian Provinces there is a tenfold difference in homicide rates related to inequality. They estimated that about half of all variation in homicide rates can be accounted for by differences in the amount of inequality in each province or state. Fajnzylber et al. (2002) found a similar relationship worldwide.

Social, cultural, and civic participation

Higher income inequality led to less of all forms of social, cultural, and civic participation among the less wealthy. When inequality is higher the poor do not shift to less expensive forms of participation

[Erdogan]

Keep in mind: Bitcoin is not designed to fix the problem on wealth distribution.

No, but the current fiat system is designed to steal money from your pocket, from your bank account and your savings every day! Each five years or so, someone takes half of it. The invisible hand of QE and ZIRP.

Bitcoin is designed to fix that.

[Peter R]

Please note that this "info-graphic" was derived from Risto's thread here on bitcointalk.org: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=316297.0  The MSM reported this as "fact" but of course we cannot know the true bitcoin wealth distribution because it is not possible to be sure which and how many addresses correspond to which individual.  

Also note this estimated bitcoin distribution is an improvement to the current state of affairs: instead of 0.1% controlling 80% of the wealth, Risto estimated that about 1% control 80% of the bitcoins.  So the bitcoins are spread 10X more widely, based on this simplistic estimate, and will probably become further distributed as bitcoin grows. 

Keep in mind: Bitcoin is not designed to fix the problem on wealth distribution.

No, but the current fiat system is designed to steal money from your pocket, from your bank account and your savings every day! Each five years or so, someone takes half of it. The invisible hand of QE and ZIRP.

Bitcoin is designed to fix that.

+1

[Xav]

Does this mean that we won't see a more even distribution of wealth?

http://bitcoinexaminer.org/wealth-distribution-fiat-currency-vs-btc-infographic/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed


The people with the most existing resources will be able to secure the most BTC through mining. How will BTC resist the concentration of wealth?

This seems like a great illustration about Bitcoin's main problem; its distribution. In a previous post I already expressed my concerns rather euphemistically. So, what's the Bitcoin-community going to do about this paradox in this new currency, because the graph shows that a limited group of people (can) control the currency. Again, my doubt reads: Is it any better to have a new currency controlled by a small group than traditional currencies controlled by the bankers and governments? What's wrong in thinking that this group determines today's value in the (free ?) market?

[Erdogan]

Does this mean that we won't see a more even distribution of wealth?

http://bitcoinexaminer.org/wealth-distribution-fiat-currency-vs-btc-infographic/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed


The people with the most existing resources will be able to secure the most BTC through mining. How will BTC resist the concentration of wealth?

This seems like a great illustration about Bitcoin's main problem; its distribution. In a previous post I already expressed my concerns rather euphemistically. So, what's the Bitcoin-community going to do about this paradox in this new currency, because the graph shows that a limited group of people (can) control the currency. Again, my doubt reads: Is it any better to have a new currency controlled by a small group than traditional currencies controlled by the bankers and governments? What's wrong in thinking that this group determines today's value in the (free ?) market?

To make it more like the fiat system, we could use taxes. A 5% tax on all bitcoin holders each year, to be paid to the early adopters. If you don't think that is reasonable, we could give them fancy titles like chairman, president, banker.