Bitcoin has a huge flaw that not too many people talk about, which is the centralization of mining due to economies of scale.

How long before the biggest 3 mining pools decide just to stop accepting blocks outside of their pools? After all, they're leaving 40% of the revenue they could be making if they just did 100% of the mining and force everyone else to go along with it, and this must irk them to no end.

My guess is next year, when the subsidy drops in half, they might decide to do just that and take control of the network. Heck, the people mining in their pool would probably support the idea. More revenue for them.

Even if they don't decide to grab hold of the network, the top miners must be kowtowed to get anything done in Bitcoin. For example, want to increase the blocksize? Make sure to confer with the biggest miners, or they might decide to just ignore you.  Doesn't sound too decentralized, does it?

Not only that, but the miners don't share the best interest with the users. Miners want more fees, more subsidy, more stability (ie control). They don't care to make a system that is nearly free to transmit value between others. They'd be happier with something like Visa or Mastercard where they could gouge 3% of every transaction.

Neucoin doesn't have this problem. The miners and the owners of the coin are the same people, anyone with a substantial mining operation would also require a comparably substantial stake. Therefore, attempting to push it towards higher fees or more centralization would destroy their own profit by reducing the value of the coin in general.

LiQio, if you think planned economies never work, explain how Ripple, probably the most planned, centralized coin in existence, has the #2 spot in the market cap right now?