The incentives of a competitor to sabotage bitcoin are proportional to total market size, not the size of the largest individual txn. With that out of the way, let's return to substantive issues.
1) Proof-of-work distribution can be copied by a proof-of-stake system. Thus any perceived distributional advantages of proof-of-work could also be enjoyed by a proof-of-stake system. This is a non-issue.
2) Proof-of-work is secured through competitive consumption of external resources. External resource consumption requires a net input of resources. This must be supported through fees levied on the user base. The exact level of fees necessary is hard to say. I think a 5% tax on each send is a plausible prediction. This is not compatible with a competitive payment platform. VISA will not need to burn fossil fuels to process each payment, but bitcoin will. This will kill bitcoin.
Proof-of-stake is secured through competitive transfers of internal resources. These transfers are expensive from an individual's perspective and thus effective in securing the system. However, they are just transfers. Transfers do not require external input of resources and thus do not require the imposition of onerous fees. This is compatible with a competitive payment platform.
3) There is never any point at which a proof-of-work currency could be more secure than an otherwise identical proof-of-stake currency. If you assume rational behavior, as soon as the first block is mined proof-of-work currency will necessarily provide inferior security. If you like, I will post a mathematical argument supporting this.
Your argument that proof-of-work enables a jump to a high level of initial security is completely wrong. It is the block reward which does this. Proof-of-work has nothing to do with it. Proof-of-stake can also have block reward.
I could not figure out why Krugmanites like yourself can not see what is obviously destructive ends of you ideas until I saw this video again today and now I SEE!
"To change the perception of reality, of every American, to such an extent that despite the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions, in the interest of defending themselves their families, their community, and their country."
"A person who was demoralized is unable to assess true information. The facts tell nothing to him. Even if I shower him with information, with authentic proof, with documents, with pictures. Even if I take him by force to the Soviet Union and show him concentration camp he will refuse to believe it until he is going to receive a kick in his fat bottom. When the military boot crashes his, then he will understand, but not before that. That's the tragic of the situation of demoralization." - Yuri Bezmenov
The banksters did the same to you so well that you are unable to see the destruction of your ideas even when you write it out yourself. I have bow down to the banksters greatness and learn what school did you go to? Now that I know there is no showing you the truth with facts I would like to learn more about how you got your education.
I apologize for my jokes and sarcasm, since there is no point in presenting facts to you I want to learn more about how you come to your conclusions. Maybe you do understand that proof-of-stake is profitable in the short run but destructive in the long run? Do you agree that in the long run we are all dead so who cares? Or do you believe its sustainable? Do you not agree that all centralized systems become compromised? I am now fascinated with your thought process.
Send me your address I will send 2 BTC for answering my questions.