Quote from: smooth on March 28, 2016, 12:26:06 AM

Quote from: kiklo on March 28, 2016, 12:21:32 AM

Quote from: smooth on March 28, 2016, 12:17:11 AM

Your argument is terrible. Nearly all of the things you mention (excluding new cars perhaps) are inherently available from many different sources. Food, water, etc. Go to probably millions of distinct habitable locations on earth and you will find them. Companionship is available from billions of people, healthcare from millions of providers, etc.

In nearly all existing proof-of-stake systems, the stake is highly concentrated by anywhere from a handful to possibly a few thousand people, in the latter case a group which likely has large internal concentration.

Moreover, the nature of paper wealth is that it is not subject to physical constraints of space or crowding and concentrates to an extraordinary degree. Nearly all of the paper wealth (trillions or quadrillions) that exist in the world are controlled by a handful of banks, or in turn collude via entities such as central banks and the IMF. That control over the bulk of wealth allows them to extend that control all the way down to banning weed stores from getting bank accounts and encumbering nearly all physical wealth in a web of debt.

Any system based on control of notional wealth is in practice permissioned.

Systems based on control of physical devices such as computers or even physical phenomenon such as electricity may become permissioned (as I would suggest Bitcoin largely has at least for the moment), but they have a fighting chance in a way that wealth-based systems such as proof of stake do not.

My Argument is better than yours,
your required a person be enclosed completely in a sealed system. (Complete Fantasy)

Stake has to be traded , if the owner want to buy anything with it, if not why do they even bother to stake.

Wealth accumulates wealth. Large stakeholders will earn large returns, and spend a little. Small stakeholders will live paycheck to paycheck and spend whatever they earn.

Furthermore, most proof-of-stake systems have in-built mechanisms that exacerbate this phenomenon. For example, a quieting time before you can stake. If you transact a lot (say from working and buying food) then you never stake. If you sit on your wealth you stake all the time.

Wealth accumulates wealth.
Really tell that to the Farmer , that wealth is divided between their children upon their deaths.

Are all of you Guys Single and don't spend any money on a Wife or Children because you seem too confused about the real word and our links to it?

Cool

FYI:

Quote

Furthermore, most proof-of-stake systems have in-built mechanisms that exacerbate this phenomenon. For example, a quieting time before you can stake. If you transact a lot (say from working and buying food) then you never stake. If you sit on your wealth you stake all the time.

That longer that quieting time, the less chance a big stakeholder can block the poor from staking.

People can always set aside some for staking and the other for spending, you know like a Checkings & Saving Account.
PoW can monopolize the earning 24x7, Proof of Stake with a decent recovery time of 15 days or more, means the large stakeholder can't stake , leaving the poorer member the opportunity to stake until they recharge, it is a much fairer system than PoW.