Again, it doesn't matter what "the market" wants, Bitcoin is not governed by free-market but by rules enforced by a consensus of its peers so as to keep every network actors' incentives aligned.
How soon we forget the peer-to-peer network is useless and worthless if it doesn't serve a market...
It's tiered. 3 tiers.
(welcome to Bitcoin by the way, I understand you're new to the subject)
Tier 1 is the development team writing rules for the consensus algorithm. This happens in the first instance (i.e. Satoshi etc)
That's how Bitcoin has been since day one.
Until it changed. It's the same with all Open Source Projects. 'In the first instance', there is the team. Later, there are the teams (competition).
"Bitcoin is the Devil's way of teaching geeks [and communists] economics."
We all know you simultaneously believe that Bitcoin already has the users at Tier 1 and also that the users should be promoted to tier 1. My advice to you and Peter and the rest of you cohort; go and do it if you believe in it so much. But don't keep implying your preferred model is the reality, or to alter the bitcoin system into that model; the model is as stated above.
Take some more advice: if you wish to make meaningful replies in any debate, it helps to establish your credibility as a participant if you can demonstrate that you comprehend any points you seek to reply to. If you cannot do this, the literal context for the argument cannot even take place, i.e. discourse, but not an argument
are not in a position to give advice about credibility.