"The rules of #Bitcoin are extremely hard to change. Anyone can access the network directly without a trusted third party. Owning more bitcoin does not give you more control over the network so all participants are on equal footing.
This is why bitcoin has value."
— nostr:npub1qny3tkh0acurzla8x3zy4nhrjz5zd8l9sy9jys09umwng00manysew95gx
Bintcoin's consensus rules are protecteed by a majority of economically active nodes.
Nodes who are economically more active that others matter more.
Hence wealth inequality and wealth concentration are a danger to Bitcoin, the same way it is to rest of the economy.
Economically active nodes matter more? Explain how?
Consider the extrem scenario where the nodes of the 10 biggest exchanges would be responsible for 80% of the transactions.
It should be immediately obvious how they are much more important in the Bitcoin economy than 10 random pleb nodes.
Eventually, Bitcoin hash rate will only be secured by transaction fees. In case of a split, the 10 nodes in this example will directly control which fork gets 80% of the hash rate, because they pay for it and the miners just follow the money.
Wealth concentration, by inequality or any other means, like centralized exchanges, is a serious danger and centralizing force, not only in Bitcoin, but to everything else as well.
Literally everything works betteer the more wealth and power is distributed.
