Richest 2000 People richer then poorest 4.6 billion

[Vishnu.Reang]

The 21 million bitcoin cap can be removed if the developers wanted to  .

Please don't beat the dead horse again and again. The limit for maximum supply will never be removed and the 21 million limit is going to be permanent. Why should the developers remove the limit, since it will reduce the value of existing coins and make them more similar to fiat currency? This is something that Ben Bernanke did to the United States Dollar. We don't want the same to happen to Bitcoin.

[1714319853]

1714319853

[omone1]

This is the unfair financial system of economy the whole world is suffering and crying about. The wealth of this world is in the hands of the very few who make the rest to pay heavy tax and make the few richer while the poor get poorer by a complex economic equation. This is why bitcoin would have ensure a good wealth distribution because it will ensure a large financial  inclusion and a bordless financial interaction.

[South Park]

It's scary to look at these statistics, but rationally speaking, what is scarier would be perfect equity.

People seem to be obsessed with equality, but when you have true equality, it means that people can't be rewarded for hard work, luck, or a combination of both. In that sense, the world would essentially become inefficient or at least relatively so compared to a world where there is some degree of inequality, but that gap can be individually closed through a function of work.

Of course, there are flaws. What I think BTC can do in this instance is provide a way for people in disadvantaged regions to have access to banking services (the unbanked, as we say), as well as giving international workers a cheap way of receiving their wages and being connected to the wider job markets.

That is pretty much the goal of communism and we know how that worked, some level of inequality when it comes to your wealth and income is inevitable, after all we are not going to pay the same to a surgeon than a maid, however we must concentrate on ways to diminish that gap somehow while still rewarding those that make greater contributions to society with more money, that is the middle ground we are trying to follow but as you know that is not an easy goal to reach.

[ubercool]

It looks like you're talking about airdropping the coin in equal amounts to all the wallets and then start the adoption of that coin commercially. People don't believe in that anymore. There was a time when projects did this and succeeded in pumping their coin 10x by listing on an exchange.
In bitcoin's case, it's still in Mass adoption phase so once that is done, we will see how much a whale is holding and how much is divided into the poor.

[Naida_BR]

In my country we have a saying that says "The money goes to the money".
And in capitalism we cannot stop this. The wealth is going to keep being accumulated to the rich people. Next year we are going to see another increase in the wealth of rich people (a big example is Jeff Bezos).

[Averim]

We encounter brutal facts. Income injustice is the biggest problem. Will Bitcoin or cryptocurrency offer a solution to this? I do not know. Who are Bitcoin whales? There is no other solution for now. Bitcoin aroused excitement.

I don't think bitcoin is the solution for it because here also big players like minors, exchange owners or some early adaptors still holding a large number of coins.  Most of the small investors are worried about the price fluctuations and most they will book small profits.

Bitcoin is created as a decentralized solution, it was never meant to bring equality between people, in my opinion until people do everything for money there will be no financial equality between them. I wonder could we live without money, like living from volunteer activities?

[7788bitcoin]

~snip
Please don't beat the dead horse again and again. The limit for maximum supply will never be removed and the 21 million limit is going to be permanent. Why should the developers remove the limit, since it will reduce the value of existing coins and make them more similar to fiat currency? This is something that Ben Bernanke did to the United States Dollar. We don't want the same to happen to Bitcoin.

I am not beating the dead horse, i just said it is a possibility that can be changed and that does not mean that the developers are going to change that. I just said it is possible to change the limit and it is a real possibility if there is a consensus that the maximum cap can be changed it is possible to change the cap we have right now. It all depends upon the general consensus and nothing is written in stone as we have seen many changes in the short period of bitcoin.

[jostorres]

Bitcoin doesn’t changes anything. You still can’t compare a poor person to a rich person when it comes to Bitcoin, because the difference is already there and there is no equality. A rich person will be able to buy more bitcoins than someone who is poor.

There are people who are able to buy more than a million dollar worth of Bitcoin, and I know for sure that I can’t afford that amount, so how do you say that I’m equal to those people? There is a huge difference. Let’s stop confusing people, bitcoin is not a route to escape from poverty, you’re still going to have to work to achieve something from Bitcoin, except that you’re lucky and your Bitcoin investment increases (and don’t forget the money you invest is still gotten from hard work).

[abhiseshakana]

This is the unfair financial system of economy the whole world is suffering and crying about. The wealth of this world is in the hands of the very few who make the rest to pay heavy tax and make the few richer while the poor get poorer by a complex economic equation. This is why bitcoin would have ensure a good wealth distribution because it will ensure a large financial  inclusion and a bordless financial interaction.

Bitcoin will not be able to change economic inequality in society or solve the problem of poverty. We must change the system created by the upper class which incidentally exploits the middle and lower classes. Because the number of middle and lower classes is more then you can imagine if we can break the chain of wealth distribution flowing to the upper classes. We must create a system of consolidation so that the majority economy revolves around the middle and lower classes only, by way of independence from the middle and lower classes and avoiding dependence on the upper class.

A simple example of moving or turning the wheel of the economy in the middle and lower classes is to start shopping at traditional markets and street vendors around your home instead of supermarkets or mini markets. It started to reduce the use of large factory products and began to promote the home industry that creates factory products for daily needs such as detergents, bath soap, toothpaste. Especially if the production is organized differently, different houses so that the production of needs in a small environment can be met between neighbors.

Do not save your money in a bank, if you have a lot of your wealth, save your money in bitcoin or in a safe deposit box so that banks cannot use your money for the benefit of the upper classes.

If a campaign like this is carried out simultaneously and the middle and lower classes are compact to use the products produced by their groups, the gap will surely decrease.

[imstillthebest]

Bitcoin doesn’t changes anything. You still can’t compare a poor person to a rich person when it comes to Bitcoin, because the difference is already there and there is no equality. A rich person will be able to buy more bitcoins than someone who is poor.

There are people who are able to buy more than a million dollar worth of Bitcoin, and I know for sure that I can’t afford that amount, so how do you say that I’m equal to those people? There is a huge difference. Let’s stop confusing people, bitcoin is not a route to escape from poverty, you’re still going to have to work to achieve something from Bitcoin, except that you’re lucky and your Bitcoin investment increases (and don’t forget the money you invest is still gotten from hard work).

there are easy to do jobs there like faucet, bounties , airdrops , etc that can give you a bitcoin or a crypto that you can exchange for bitcoin  but i guess there are still workd involved on these activites  .  we also hear many inspiring news that a person became rich after engaging on bitcoins or on crypto  , so its possible to happen for one of us that are also involved on here   .  those number of rich people are small compare to poor but when we combine those many number of poor people and thier wealth plus thier crypto/bitcoin hodlings . i think we can overcome them   ?

[wheelz1200]

Richest 2000 People richer then the poorest 4.6 billion.
Richest 26 persons richer then 3.8 billion people.

Today I read this in the newspaper that Oxfam Novib calculated this in their report called time to care about economic inequality.
Especially women in underdeveloped country's are stuck in poverty and can't get out.

We all know this has been going on for years but it is pretty shocking to see the enormous difference in these numbers.
It is also hard to comprehend that most concentrated part of the wealth is hold bye a small club of men.

How do you think this is devided with Bitcoin we can all just see the top richest wallets in Bitcoin, but do you think Bitcoin is more fair devided then the current money system?
What would be the most fair way of dividing a cryptocurrency so the whole world is actually part of it and gets wealth?

Unfortunately that is not how and what cryptocurrency was created for.  It was not meant to be a socialistic tool to even everyone in the world out.  What it gave is the ability to be their own banks and bank more freely.  Equality is not in the cards when crypto is bought and sold in an open market

[maye5104]

Satoshi planned that Bitcoin would be fair divided, but something went wrong. But what did you expect? The rich don't care about the equality, they just want to get as much as possible.

[ser7878]

Satoshi planned that Bitcoin would be fair divided, but something went wrong. But what did you expect? The rich don't care about the equality, they just want to get as much as possible.

Wouldn't you act the same if you'd have much more wealth than you do have now?
I mean we shouldn't blame the people in top 2000, but the economy system we all build around for past 100 years

[South Park]

In my country we have a saying that says "The money goes to the money".
And in capitalism we cannot stop this. The wealth is going to keep being accumulated to the rich people. Next year we are going to see another increase in the wealth of rich people (a big example is Jeff Bezos).

That is inevitable, a person that has a lot of money can use that money to hire the greatest experts in whatever field of expertise he may like and improve his chances of making more money, while a poor person can only rely on his own abilities, and when we take into account that many of those rich people became like that because of their abilities then their advantage becomes even greater, as such it is impossible for such inequality in skills to not create an inequality in the outcome.

[alexkamillakroy]

Well, it's "eat the rich" all the way, folks   

To topic: i don't think so, although I do feel that top 0,000...1% (those who are literally 30 persons vs 3,5 billion) did get their dough through good old "traditional" ways

[deisik]

I am not beating the dead horse, i just said it is a possibility that can be changed and that does not mean that the developers are going to change that. I just said it is possible to change the limit and it is a real possibility if there is a consensus that the maximum cap can be changed it is possible to change the cap we have right now. It all depends upon the general consensus and nothing is written in stone as we have seen many changes in the short period of bitcoin

That would herald the end of Bitcoin as we know it

So, in a way, it could be claimed that changing things which make Bitcoin Bitcoin (like the 21M hard cap) are not a real possibility for Bitcoin. Other than that, we don't actually need to change Bitcoin's major specs as we could easily hard fork it and call the spin-off Advanced Bitcoin, or whatever, with, for example, a more advanced hard cap. If you are going to claim that it won't be a genuine Bitcoin, one and only, then the same reasoning is equally applicable to changing the fundamental specs of a genuine Bitcoin, a Bitcoin that we are all familiar with

[redsun114]

Bitcoin is not the solution we have in solving the problem of poverty, it’s not even among the solutions. Yes you can invest in Bitcoin and you might lucky and price would go up and you will make lots of money, but even for that to happen and for it to even benefit you, you will have to invest for a long term and probably years similar to what those that made it had to wait. And it’s not everyone that can do that, a poor person doesn’t even have money to be investing in stocks and assets, they will only be looking for means to get food on their table and not investment. You only talk about investment when you have more than enough on your table.

Solving the issue of poverty is something that is left for us to do, especially the rich in the society and the government. They should start by providing enough jobs, supporting pay equity, increasing minimum wage, and a lot of things to do.

[deisik]

Solving the issue of poverty is something that is left for us to do, especially the rich in the society and the government. They should start by providing enough jobs, supporting pay equity, increasing minimum wage, and a lot of things to do

I agree with the first part of your post (which I didn't quote)

But I disagree with this one. The point is, you can't "provide" jobs, even though some governments are trying to do exactly that. It can only be a temporary solution. The wealth of a nation entirely depends on the nation as a whole, not on its government or just some tiny part of it, the rich. To rephrase Bill Gates, if you are born poor it is not your fault, but if you die poor it is. I know it sounds somewhat rude and maybe even cynical to a degree, but isn't it still true by and large, and still more so with respect to an entire nation or country during its lifetime?