Crypto - of the poor by the poor for the poor

[JaanusRaim]

I am not asserting that this provocative sentence is 100% true. Nor I have enough information to prove that it is 100% true.
I even admit that this is not probably 100% true.

BUT

I make three bets:
1) "Crypto - of the poor by the poor for the poor" is not fully false as well. Not at all! There is remarkably large amount of truth in it - may-be 60%, may-me 70%, may-be even 80%.

2) The second part of the sentence ("of the poor by the poor for the poor") is significantly more true for crypto than for other popular investment instruments (for example stocks or real estate) as well as for other technological miracles of nowadays world (for example electronic computers or internet).

3) "Crypto - of the poor by the poor for the poor" is much more true than most nowadays people think. This meme is strongly undervalued in the memes market relative to its truth content. The dominant narratives of the present era tie cryptocurrencies rather with the rich than with the poor.


The basis of these bets is not only fantasy. As following I present some facts and findings that can at least partly justify making such bets.

Many cryptos advantages in relation to other investment instruments positively discriminate the people who have little or no capital.
Firstly, providing free starting capital from the FairMillions, FreeBitco.in and others (Where are the trillion usd market cap stocks that are provided for free for everyone?).
Secondly, the liquidity of the small market cap cryptos that is much better for small capital amounts and therefore provides much better investment opportunities for smaller capital.
Thirdly, the public, open nature of the cryptos as the shares (parts) of reputation in comparison with the secret, closed nature of stocks as the shares (parts) of business. The last give the tremendously high advantage to insiders and force all remaining just to gamble in blind trust whereas in cryptos there is much more solid basis for outsiders to make sound investment decisions based on information publicly available. Business is secret by nature, reputation is public by nature - therefore it is much much easier to calculate fundamental values for cryptos than for stocks if you are not an insider.
Fourthly, the exceptionally high volatility of cryptos that makes sound investments increase in the pace that is almost unprecedented outside and that is much more suitable for people who start with no capital.

In addition to that, there is some evidence that most the creators of crypto (Bitcoin) were not rich or at least they were not (financially) rich in comparison with their intellectual richness. At least we can say that if they were rich they hid their richness very well. The first Bitcoin investors who were (publicly) rich were the Winklevoss twins and their investment itself remarkably helped to rocket the BTC price into the sky. Before Winklevosses there were no rich Bitcoin investor who put substantial proportion of his capital into Bitcoin (please correct me if I am wrong!). Of cause, the last does not 100% prove that the creators and pioneers had no great financial capital - only that they did not use it for buying BTC. It is probable that they were all perfectly happy with the amounts they were able to mine and just did not want to buy more from the market.... but this probability is not big.

And last but not last - the explanation that the crypto creators provide to their creation. This was everything but elitist. This was as anti establishment and anarchist as possible. This did not treat "our" government as a friend. This did not treat a blind trust as the main virtue of mankind.
Yes, they did not declared that crypto is designed to help the poor. They stressed on freedom rather than on "help". May-be they knew that the poor really does not need any fish but just fishing equipment  

[noorman0]

-snip-

In addition to that, there is some evidence that most the creators of crypto (Bitcoin) were not rich or at least they were not (financially) rich in comparison with their intellectual richness. At least we can say that if they were rich they hid their richness very well. The first Bitcoin investors who were (publicly) rich were the Winklevoss twins and their investment itself remarkably helped to rocket the BTC price into the sky. Before Winklevosses there were no rich Bitcoin investor who put substantial proportion of his capital into Bitcoin (please correct me if I am wrong!). Of cause, the last does not 100% prove that the creators and pioneers had no great financial capital - only that they did not use it for buying BTC. It is probable that they were all perfectly happy with the amounts they were able to mine and just did not want to buy more from the market.... but this probability is not big.

Figuratively, you're right. People who feel wealthy won't do things that stress them out. In reality, that might be wrong; I wouldn't speculate about Satoshi's financial background before Bitcoin, but the ideal of financial freedom here could mean that some wealthy group is hoping for the emergence of a super-sophisticated, uncensored entity to secure their wealth.

Historically, whales didn't become involved immediately when the first block was mined, but gradually after Bitcoin reached a certain value and circulation. but also for the wealthy who are willing to wait a little longer.

[JaanusRaim]

-snip-

In addition to that, there is some evidence that most the creators of crypto (Bitcoin) were not rich or at least they were not (financially) rich in comparison with their intellectual richness. At least we can say that if they were rich they hid their richness very well. The first Bitcoin investors who were (publicly) rich were the Winklevoss twins and their investment itself remarkably helped to rocket the BTC price into the sky. Before Winklevosses there were no rich Bitcoin investor who put substantial proportion of his capital into Bitcoin (please correct me if I am wrong!). Of cause, the last does not 100% prove that the creators and pioneers had no great financial capital - only that they did not use it for buying BTC. It is probable that they were all perfectly happy with the amounts they were able to mine and just did not want to buy more from the market.... but this probability is not big.

Figuratively, you're right. People who feel wealthy won't do things that stress them out. In reality, that might be wrong; I wouldn't speculate about Satoshi's financial background before Bitcoin, but the ideal of financial freedom here could mean that some wealthy group is hoping for the emergence of a super-sophisticated, uncensored entity to secure their wealth.

Historically, whales didn't become involved immediately when the first block was mined, but gradually after Bitcoin reached a certain value and circulation. but also for the wealthy who are willing to wait a little longer.

The wealth of the rich was not secured enough before the emergence of crypto - and now it is more secure.  I guess that for some wealthy group it is possible indeed.

And all the help for the poor is only the byproduct ? And the anarchist explanation that the creators provided us is only a mask ?

[DPHOR]

And last but not last - the explanation that the crypto creators provide to their creation. This was everything but elitist. This was as anti establishment and anarchist as possible. This did not treat "our" government as a friend. This did not treat a blind trust as the main virtue of mankind.
Yes, they did not declared that crypto is designed to help the poor. They stressed on freedom rather than on "help". May-be they knew that the poor really does not need any fish but just fishing equipment  

To me cryptocurrency is for everyone who is everly ready to accept all the volatility and things that relates Bitcoin and to the entire space because this could turned someone into a big gem due to their investments and of course, not only the poor we have out there anyone can freely have access to the space to do whatever they needs than just relying on other things for wealth. Yes cryptocurrency and Bitcoin at large today has already given us the benefit of doubt that we have been enslaved by banks and government, but today anyone can freely use Bitcoin at their own spare time to make a better transaction without even waiting for the approval of third party.

[JaanusRaim]

And last but not last - the explanation that the crypto creators provide to their creation. This was everything but elitist. This was as anti establishment and anarchist as possible. This did not treat "our" government as a friend. This did not treat a blind trust as the main virtue of mankind.
Yes, they did not declared that crypto is designed to help the poor. They stressed on freedom rather than on "help". May-be they knew that the poor really does not need any fish but just fishing equipment  

To me cryptocurrency is for everyone who is everly ready to accept all the volatility and things that relates Bitcoin and to the entire space because this could turned someone into a big gem due to their investments and of course, not only the poor we have out there anyone can freely have access to the space to do whatever they needs than just relying on other things for wealth. Yes cryptocurrency and Bitcoin at large today has already given us the benefit of doubt that we have been enslaved by banks and government, but today anyone can freely use Bitcoin at their own spare time to make a better transaction without even waiting for the approval of third party.

Of cause, for everyone. "The poor" had the special emphasis only because in the past we were almost always in the inferior position.

[programmer3666]

Yes for sure, crypto gives people with small money a chance. You can start with little, join early projects or even earn free tokens sometimes. That is something you don’t really see in things like stocks or real estate where you need bigger capital. But at the same time, it is not just for the poor. Big players and institutions are also heavily involved now. In fact, they usually have more advantage because they can move the market with large money. Simple case will be someone with $100 can buy a small coin and hope it grows, but a whale with millions can pump or dump that same coin and control the outcome. So both the poor and the rich are in crypto, just not on the same level. The ecosystem gives opportunities to everyone, but how much you benefit still depends on your knowledge, discipline and capital.

[JaanusRaim]

Yes for sure, crypto gives people with small money a chance. You can start with little, join early projects or even earn free tokens sometimes. That is something you don’t really see in things like stocks or real estate where you need bigger capital. But at the same time, it is not just for the poor. Big players and institutions are also heavily involved now. In fact, they usually have more advantage because they can move the market with large money. Simple case will be someone with $100 can buy a small coin and hope it grows, but a whale with millions can pump or dump that same coin and control the outcome. So both the poor and the rich are in crypto, just not on the same level. The ecosystem gives opportunities to everyone, but how much you benefit still depends on your knowledge, discipline and capital.

Yes, very small money (or just interest) has a great chance in crypto unlike in almost any other asset class.


Can we say that the rich tend to have advantage in absolute terms and the poor in relative terms (bigger profit per usd) ?

[Alphakilo]

Crypto currency is as you stressed a tool for the poor to size up and get wealth because it provides opportunities from airdrops, yield farming or even something like creating a telegram mini app without one needing a capital to even start up, but with a laptop, and good brains.
It is just giving the poor in the society where their currency is failing, a decentralized, permission less ledger to compete with big pockets in the society and live well.
It is freedom because the poor man would be counting on high volatility to attain wealth, while the rich man would see it as a problem due to liquidation of their assets at this time of price fluctuation.

[Marykeller]

And last but not last - the explanation that the crypto creators provide to their creation. This was everything but elitist. This was as anti establishment and anarchist as possible. This did not treat "our" government as a friend. This did not treat a blind trust as the main virtue of mankind.
Yes, they did not declared that crypto is designed to help the poor. They stressed on freedom rather than on "help". May-be they knew that the poor really does not need any fish but just fishing equipment  

To me cryptocurrency is for everyone who is everly ready to accept all the volatility and things that relates Bitcoin and to the entire space because this could turned someone into a big gem due to their investments and of course, not only the poor we have out there anyone can freely have access to the space to do whatever they needs than just relying on other things for wealth. Yes cryptocurrency and Bitcoin at large today has already given us the benefit of doubt that we have been enslaved by banks and government, but today anyone can freely use Bitcoin at their own spare time to make a better transaction without even waiting for the approval of third party.

Of cause, for everyone. "The poor" had the special emphasis only because in the past we were almost always in the inferior position.

Crypto is not for everyone, don't think it is. It is for those who understands it volatility and are ready to take the risk of investment of it because not everyone can afford to lose their money in crypto, and act cool, if they invested in shitcoins not in Bitcoin because it is Bitcoin someone can invest in. They have hope that they can recover their losses.

So my point is, Bitcoin is not for everyone. It is for those who have the basic knowledge, and they understand what Bitcoin is, and the reason they are investing and hodling onto it.

[JaanusRaim]

It is freedom because the poor man would be counting on high volatility to attain wealth, while the rich man would see it as a problem due to liquidation of their assets at this time of price fluctuation.

Exactly. It depends on the angle you see this !

And the same is with the calculation of fundamental value. People are so used to see everything from the rich mans (insiders) viewpoint that most think sincerely that it is easier to calculate stocks fundamental values than cryptos fundamental values. And they forget that this is only an insiders view-point.
 
The narrative (and half-truth) "Stocks fundamental values are easier to calculate" is remarkably well marketed and most people sincerely believe in it.

[jossiel]

Can we say that the rich tend to have advantage in absolute terms and the poor in relative terms (bigger profit per usd) ?

They have the advantage from the very start because they have the means, the money and the capital.

As for the poor, we can't decline that in general because there have been stories who have been poor before but trusted and believed to the potential of Bitcoin.

They bought in the lowest price and the same goes with other altcoins, and then waited for years and here they are, one of the happiest people on Earth after taking so much profit.

Although profit really depends on capital and when they bought.

[tvplus006]

Yes for sure, crypto gives people with small money a chance. You can start with little, join early projects or even earn free tokens sometimes. That is something you don’t really see in things like stocks or real estate where you need bigger capital. But at the same time, it is not just for the poor. Big players and institutions are also heavily involved now. In fact, they usually have more advantage because they can move the market with large money. Simple case will be someone with $100 can buy a small coin and hope it grows, but a whale with millions can pump or dump that same coin and control the outcome. So both the poor and the rich are in crypto, just not on the same level. The ecosystem gives opportunities to everyone, but how much you benefit still depends on your knowledge, discipline and capital.

Of course, all the profits go to the rich, while the poor are content with crumbs from the table, receiving several tens or even hundreds of bucks. Large capital has the opportunity to invest millions of dollars at an early stage, while poor people get the opportunity to buy this token from them after TGE at a price tens or hundreds of times higher than face value.

[JaanusRaim]

Yes for sure, crypto gives people with small money a chance. You can start with little, join early projects or even earn free tokens sometimes. That is something you don’t really see in things like stocks or real estate where you need bigger capital. But at the same time, it is not just for the poor. Big players and institutions are also heavily involved now. In fact, they usually have more advantage because they can move the market with large money. Simple case will be someone with $100 can buy a small coin and hope it grows, but a whale with millions can pump or dump that same coin and control the outcome. So both the poor and the rich are in crypto, just not on the same level. The ecosystem gives opportunities to everyone, but how much you benefit still depends on your knowledge, discipline and capital.

Of course, all the profits go to the rich, while the poor are content with crumbs from the table, receiving several tens or even hundreds of bucks. Large capital has the opportunity to invest millions of dollars at an early stage, while poor people get the opportunity to buy this token from them after TGE at a price tens or hundreds of times higher than face value.

Who invested millions of dollars at an early stage of (for example Bitcoin) ? 
The first publicly known million-dollar-investors were Winklevosses but they started when BTC was already about four years old.

[barbara44]

Yes for sure, crypto gives people with small money a chance. You can start with little, join early projects or even earn free tokens sometimes. That is something you don’t really see in things like stocks or real estate where you need bigger capital. But at the same time, it is not just for the poor. Big players and institutions are also heavily involved now. In fact, they usually have more advantage because they can move the market with large money. Simple case will be someone with $100 can buy a small coin and hope it grows, but a whale with millions can pump or dump that same coin and control the outcome. So both the poor and the rich are in crypto, just not on the same level. The ecosystem gives opportunities to everyone, but how much you benefit still depends on your knowledge, discipline and capital.

Of course, all the profits go to the rich, while the poor are content with crumbs from the table, receiving several tens or even hundreds of bucks. Large capital has the opportunity to invest millions of dollars at an early stage, while poor people get the opportunity to buy this token from them after TGE at a price tens or hundreds of times higher than face value.

Right, I think the market might be unfair to the poor. Usually it is the rich who will fill their plates first and any leftovers will go to the poor. Now, usually in these leftovers, there is hardly any profits left as all of the profit was already booked by the rich who are sitting first at the table. Poor would need to make some extra effort to hunt and find those extra profits. This is also because the rich is able to invest larger sums as compared to the poor. The larger the investment is, the lower will be the risk which would increase the profit potential.

Poor would usually make such mistakes to buy tokens at higher face value. They have no other option left as the investment required at the initial stage might be too much for them. Poor will usually looking for opportunities where they can invest minimum amount but still ride the hype.

[justdimin]

I think the market might be unfair to the poor. Usually it is the rich who will fill their plates first and any leftovers will go to the poor. Now, usually in these leftovers, there is hardly any profits left as all of the profit was already booked by the rich who are sitting first at the table. Poor would need to make some extra effort to hunt and find those extra profits. This is also because the rich is able to invest larger sums as compared to the poor. The larger the investment is, the lower will be the risk which would increase the profit potential.

Poor would usually make such mistakes to buy tokens at higher face value. They have no other option left as the investment required at the initial stage might be too much for them. Poor will usually looking for opportunities where they can invest minimum amount but still ride the hype.

Even I don't think it is true. Cryptos were originally designed to renovate the payment system by introducing a decentralized layer. This does not mean that cryptos will be affordable to everyone. Especially for the poor, the don't really have that great interest in cryptos as the entry cost is too high and usually not their cup of tea.

Poor do not really care about investing or exploring digital options to store or earn money. All they focus will be their present and how to survive the future. They do not have any high hopes as they have been living the same life since they were born.

Also, I don't understand "by the poor". I don't think Satoshi might be poor by any chance as he/she/they seem much technologically advanced which might be the outcome of their expensive education.

[CONVOAI]

You compared stocks and crypto but listed companies have audited reports regulations and dividend history and legal accountability which crypto often lacks. Yes there are insider advantages in stocks but crypto also sees whales coordinated pumps and insider token allocations. So it is hard to call the plan public and fair. There are pros and cons to both sides.

[shinratensei_]

You compared stocks and crypto but listed companies have audited reports regulations and dividend history and legal accountability which crypto often lacks. Yes there are insider advantages in stocks but crypto also sees whales coordinated pumps and insider token allocations. So it is hard to call the plan public and fair. There are pros and cons to both sides.

Hard to deny that crypto often lacks in the matter of audited reports and dividend. The good news is, such thing only happen to fake crypto projects where it is actually a centralized entity under the hood.
True crypto like bitcoin is transparent and everything is clear and recorded clearly within the ledger.

[Alpen]

Being poor often means being uneducated and forced to work round the clock just to survive. Crypto, however, demands knowledge. Researching the right coins and having the patience to hold a position requires time—something a poor person simply doesn't have.

This is why they fall for reckless gambles. Look at the biggest crypto Ponzi scandals: the primary victims were the poor in developing nations who lost their last savings, with some even starving to death.

In reality, crypto has become a punishment for the poor and a tool for scammers and dictators. North Korea is building nuclear bombs with stolen crypto. It seems as though crypto was created solely to destroy the world

[SilverCryptoBullet]

I make three bets:
1) "Crypto - of the poor by the poor for the poor" is not fully false as well. Not at all! There is remarkably large amount of truth in it - may-be 60%, may-me 70%, may-be even 80%.

2) The second part of the sentence ("of the poor by the poor for the poor") is significantly more true for crypto than for other popular investment instruments (for example stocks or real estate) as well as for other technological miracles of nowadays world (for example electronic computers or internet).

3) "Crypto - of the poor by the poor for the poor" is much more true than most nowadays people think. This meme is strongly undervalued in the memes market relative to its truth content. The dominant narratives of the present era tie cryptocurrencies rather with the rich than with the poor.

Crypto is for everyone, both the rich and the poor so I disagree with you.

Sometimes, some rich people try to say like you said, but you know such rich people try to make more money from cryptocurrency too. They can try doing this in a good way with legit business or in a bad way with scam projects.

Cryptocurrency market since 2009 after Bitcoin creation and first altcoin months later has actually given many easy chances for getting rich but at the same time, in a same market, there is risk to get poor easily and quickly too.

Like Spot ETFs, are they from the rich or the poor?

[fuguebtc]

Like Spot ETFs, are they from the rich or the poor?

To date, investors have poured $56 billion into Bitcoin ETF, and total asset under management have reached $95 billion. I wonder how poor people can possess such large sums of money?

Cryptocurrency is an open market, accessible to everyone regardless of class, nationality, or gender. Crypto is not created exclusively for anyone in particular, and there are no barriers or restrictions on participation.

https://www.fxleaders.com/news/2026/04/15/bitcoin-etfs-see-411-million-inflows-after-goldman-sachs-filing-total-aum-hits-96-5-billion/