4 ms·

~2.3% of addresses own ~95% of all bitcoins. [1] How is a cryptocurrency with this type of wealth inequality supposed to help the common person? It's already

~2.3% of addresses own ~95% of all bitcoins. [1] How is a cryptocurrency with this type of wealth inequality supposed to help the common person? It's already centralized, thus easy to manipulate. Bitcoin is reproducing the same type of wealth distribution we see in real life. What exactly does btc offer? I don't understand how one can look at this distribution of bitcoins, where essentially the 1% owns most of it and people conclude that somehow this is different? That this in your favor as a newcomer? To me this looks like if you buy in now, you're going to become a bagholder for the 1%. [1] https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses.html https://bitinfocharts.com/top-100-richest-bitcoin-addresses....

weird-eye-issue 6y ago
Why do you think it is "supposed to help the common person"? That seems like a weird assumption to start at.
- raziel2701 6y ago
  Because its proponents claim it's gonna make you rich. That you gotta board this rocket before it takes off to the moon. A lot of the propaganda I remember about bitcoin is that it was going to help bank the unbanked. What I see about btc is that people will tell you anything to get you to buy. The goalposts get moved and depending on who you talk to: "it's a store of value, no it's like a stock! No it's a currency! No it's the instrument of world peace!" Every time I go through comment sections it's like a magic 8 ball is coming up with the arguments in its favor. All I see is that data above, about how heavily centralized bitcoin is. What's the reason to buy into something that's heavily weighed against you?
  - BurningFrog 6y ago
    Never seek wisdom in comment sections.
    - chokeartist 6y ago
      One should frame this quote and hang it in a hallway.
  - weird-eye-issue 6y ago
    Yeah and people were saying that about GME at $400 or about every penny stock ever. You need to learn to sort through the noise.
xiphias2 6y ago
The distribution of capital allocation doesn’t change by adopting a non-central bank based monetary system. The thing you can choose is who is doing the capital allocation: Satoshi / Winklewoss brothers / Chamath / Elon Musk / Michael Saylor, or Trump / Biden / Putin / Christine Lagarde. If you like Biden and Jerome Powell, keep your money in USD. If you like Putin, buy RUB. If you prefer the libertarian crowd, buy Bitcoin. If none of this is good there are socialist cryptocurrencies as well for you to choose from or you can create your own.
- pjc50 6y ago
  Currency is not a fandom.
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    For me it is, as I don't live in North Korea
  - iso1210 6y ago
    And Bitcoin isn't a currency
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
627467 6y ago
I'm wondering what is the wealth distribution of Fiat, using the criteria you set.
- luckman212 6y ago
  I was thinking the same thing. They do call them 1%-ers after all...
- belltaco 6y ago
  Governments and central banks can and do make it a lot better by being able to print money and run social welfare programs off them, apart from taxation and other revenue. That's the reason that even gold producing countries have moved off the gold standard. Runaway deflation is as scary and catastrophic as runaway inflation seen in Zimbabwe.
- iso1210 6y ago
  https://www.visualcapitalist.com/global-wealth-concentration/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/global-wealth-concentration... 0.7% own 45.9% 8.5% own 85.6%
api 6y ago
A lot of those are exchange wallets, and the wealth distribution of fiat currency in many societies is not much better. There are tons of valid criticisms of Bitcoin but this one doesn't amount to much.
- raziel2701 6y ago
  Let's zoom out a bit. Is btc a currency or a stock or a store of value? Because depending on what you believe it is it will change how the discussion goes from here. As a currency, which is what you mentioned, btc is awful. It's deflationary so nobody wants to spend it, it's volatile so you can get fucked in a transaction by the time it settles, and if you do spend it you have to pay a transaction fee. And where's the upside from all this pain? Nothing, cash is good enough. If it's a store of value or a stock, then you should be absolutely worried about how it's distributed. Because based on that, it looks a lot like a ponzi scheme to me.
  - CarelessExpert 6y ago
    > If it's a store of value or a stock, then you should be absolutely worried about how it's distributed. Because based on that, it looks a lot like a ponzi scheme to me. I don't follow this logic. A ponzi scheme requires new entrants to pay out the previous ones at a higher rate so as to generate promised returns. I'd expect this to spread out bitcoin ownership as previous whales ducked out while leaving the new entrants to holding the bag. A high level of BTC concentration, then, would seem to be a counter-argument to the claim it's a ponzi. What am I missing? (BTW, I also think the basic analysis is incorrect--a large reason why BTC is concentrated in a small number of addresses is because most people don't hold their own BTC, but rather allow an exchange to hold it for them)
tromp 6y ago
> Bitcoin is reproducing the same type of wealth distribution we see in real life. That would be the best it can hope for. But it's very far from that. Just consider that one person (Satoshi) holds ~10% of all bitcoin. Or 2 other people (Winklevii) holding a few %. The poor distribution is amplified by bitcoin being deflationary and emitting half in just the first 4 years (3/4 in the first 8, etc). A coin with a pure linear emission would at least keep eroding any wealth inequalities.

weird-eye-issue 6y ago

Why do you think it is "supposed to help the common person"? That seems like a weird assumption to start at.

raziel2701 6y ago
Because its proponents claim it's gonna make you rich. That you gotta board this rocket before it takes off to the moon. A lot of the propaganda I remember about bitcoin is that it was going to help bank the unbanked. What I see about btc is that people will tell you anything to get you to buy. The goalposts get moved and depending on who you talk to: "it's a store of value, no it's like a stock! No it's a currency! No it's the instrument of world peace!" Every time I go through comment sections it's like a magic 8 ball is coming up with the arguments in its favor. All I see is that data above, about how heavily centralized bitcoin is. What's the reason to buy into something that's heavily weighed against you?
- BurningFrog 6y ago
  Never seek wisdom in comment sections.
  - chokeartist 6y ago
    One should frame this quote and hang it in a hallway.
- weird-eye-issue 6y ago
  Yeah and people were saying that about GME at $400 or about every penny stock ever. You need to learn to sort through the noise.

xiphias2 6y ago

The distribution of capital allocation doesn’t change by adopting a non-central bank based monetary system. The thing you can choose is who is doing the capital allocation: Satoshi / Winklewoss brothers / Chamath / Elon Musk / Michael Saylor, or Trump / Biden / Putin / Christine Lagarde. If you like Biden and Jerome Powell, keep your money in USD. If you like Putin, buy RUB. If you prefer the libertarian crowd, buy Bitcoin. If none of this is good there are socialist cryptocurrencies as well for you to choose from or you can create your own.

pjc50 6y ago
Currency is not a fandom.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  For me it is, as I don't live in North Korea
- iso1210 6y ago
  And Bitcoin isn't a currency

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

627467 6y ago

I'm wondering what is the wealth distribution of Fiat, using the criteria you set.

luckman212 6y ago
I was thinking the same thing. They do call them 1%-ers after all...
belltaco 6y ago
Governments and central banks can and do make it a lot better by being able to print money and run social welfare programs off them, apart from taxation and other revenue. That's the reason that even gold producing countries have moved off the gold standard. Runaway deflation is as scary and catastrophic as runaway inflation seen in Zimbabwe.
iso1210 6y ago
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/global-wealth-concentration/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/global-wealth-concentration... 0.7% own 45.9% 8.5% own 85.6%

api 6y ago

A lot of those are exchange wallets, and the wealth distribution of fiat currency in many societies is not much better. There are tons of valid criticisms of Bitcoin but this one doesn't amount to much.

raziel2701 6y ago
Let's zoom out a bit. Is btc a currency or a stock or a store of value? Because depending on what you believe it is it will change how the discussion goes from here. As a currency, which is what you mentioned, btc is awful. It's deflationary so nobody wants to spend it, it's volatile so you can get fucked in a transaction by the time it settles, and if you do spend it you have to pay a transaction fee. And where's the upside from all this pain? Nothing, cash is good enough. If it's a store of value or a stock, then you should be absolutely worried about how it's distributed. Because based on that, it looks a lot like a ponzi scheme to me.
- CarelessExpert 6y ago
  > If it's a store of value or a stock, then you should be absolutely worried about how it's distributed. Because based on that, it looks a lot like a ponzi scheme to me. I don't follow this logic. A ponzi scheme requires new entrants to pay out the previous ones at a higher rate so as to generate promised returns. I'd expect this to spread out bitcoin ownership as previous whales ducked out while leaving the new entrants to holding the bag. A high level of BTC concentration, then, would seem to be a counter-argument to the claim it's a ponzi. What am I missing? (BTW, I also think the basic analysis is incorrect--a large reason why BTC is concentrated in a small number of addresses is because most people don't hold their own BTC, but rather allow an exchange to hold it for them)

tromp 6y ago

> Bitcoin is reproducing the same type of wealth distribution we see in real life. That would be the best it can hope for. But it's very far from that. Just consider that one person (Satoshi) holds ~10% of all bitcoin. Or 2 other people (Winklevii) holding a few %. The poor distribution is amplified by bitcoin being deflationary and emitting half in just the first 4 years (3/4 in the first 8, etc). A coin with a pure linear emission would at least keep eroding any wealth inequalities.