The problem here is equality. People invented and see bitcoin as a "store value" because they want to protect themselves from the inequality being forced upon them from governments printing fiat. As so, your idea that people:
>don't get outraged at Pareto distributions
is in contradiction to
>Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies) does bring value to our society as a store of wealth
After all, if people weren't outraged at Pareto distributions why would it matter to them to store their wealth?
To reiterate, the greater point being made is that bitcoin ultimately won't solve anything regarding inequality. Adopting bitcoin isn't going against the man, it's just shifting who the man is from being "the government/FED" to "crypto exchanges/peddlers/other earlier hoarding crypto entities". With time people will come to hate such authorities just as they've come to hate the government. I mean just look at how people hate on mature big corps like Google these days, when many gave it fonder thoughts during it's earlier days... Bitcoin will be no different.
My personal take on this is that it's a temporary state of affairs. You might draw an analogy to the wild west of the Internet in the past, or e-mail. As Bitcoin goes mainstream, if it does, you will see familiar institutions built on it including fractional reserve banking that honor all the comfortable consumer things if you remain within their system.
It's funny how people keep saying this as if it's true. 99% of the market isn't buying crypto to "store value". This along with the idea that somehow it's a great currency bcs "no gov't" etc. is also a lie no one believes. Most of the market isn't actually making real-world transactions or storing value but somehow other people will start doing it in the future for some reason so gainz etc.
Yes. So what? I don't think the typical Bitcoin proponent is the kind of person to get outraged at Pareto distributions. They are against governments, they don't hate wealthy people just for being wealthy.
> The problem with that hypothetical endgame is that reallocating the world's wealth according to how early someone went all-in on a cryptocurrency gamble (and how much capital they had to invest at the time) would create inequality at unimaginable scale, not to mention completely disconnecting wealth from societal value creation.
How is that different from having invested in Amazon, Google or Apple in the early 00's?
Bitcoin (and other cryptocurrencies) does bring value to our society as a store of wealth that's not easy for governments to control.