I really don't see how crytocurrency is going to solve this problem at all.
It does not prevent the problem of a few people having way more wealth/power than others; at best, it just chooses a different set of people to be the wealthy ones.
It does not prevent the problem of a few people having way more wealth/power than others; at best, it just chooses a different set of people to be the wealthy ones.
Imagine an ICO that gives more reward when users provide a proof-of-income, and more tokens go to those worse off (sort of like a graduated income tax, but for ICOs). Not saying it's a good idea, just that it's programable so we can make it do whatever we think is best, it's up to us to determine what's best. The right model would require some iteration and experimentation.
There are hard challenges I don't have an answer for -- eg, the less well off probably overlap with those less likely to be engaged with weird internet experiments -- but they feel surmountable, if we want to solve it.
However, by being decentralized it prevents any mechanism of checking the power gained. Yes, centralization can be used as a means of maintaining power, but it can also be used as a way of checking power. Decentralization has no way of checking power.
For the same reason that democracy is more equitable than a dictatorship or a monarchy