If you want to argue ...
The point is, that all those early-adopters-got-rich-and-i-dont-that's-not-fair-whining argues that early adopters made a shitload of money because they were mining early.
That argument is false.IF (and that's a big IF) early adopters made a shitload of money, it had nothing todo with mining, it had todo with
keeping the coins, or hoarding as people like to call it.
You fail in your arguments by assuming that it was easier AND more (or as) profitable as it is today, which is untrue.
As an early adopter you might have been able to solve 2Blocks a day, giving you 100BTC, but with a price of 0.01cent per coin, that would've been just $1 a day (not counting power used).
Today you might no longer be able to solve 2Blocks and 100BTC a day on your own, but even at a mere 0.025BTC per day and a price of $40 you'd still make the same $1 a day.
Where's the advantage of the early adopter here?
An early adopter could have made as much money (or even more) by just buying the coins when it was around 0.01cent,
you'd probably still say that'd be "unfair", although it has nothing todo with the initial distribution.