With a cap of 21 million coins, most people were never going to have much more than that anyway.  If Bitcoin had been distributed equally between every internet user today, each person would have ~.006 BTC.  But since early block rewards were 50 BTC to give this new economy a jump-start, the average person will undoubtedly have less than that amount.  But, if you move the decimal place in a fashion that most people would be accustomed to, smaller amounts might sound like a more substantial sum.  It also stands to reason that those seemingly smaller sums are going to represent more value over time than they currently do.  It's therefore likely that the price could go much higher.

And on top of all that, it's still no less unbalanced than traditional money, even when we were still using the gold standard.  But now that we're off that and banksters can magic up a $1.2 Quadrillion derivatives market, ~20x the size of the rest of the world economy, out of literally nowhere, along with all the rest of the quantitative easing and incessant money printing, one could easily argue that Bitcoin is the more fair system out of the two.  Not to mention the system which is going to be more resilient to the inevitable moment when that mountain of IOUs comes tumbling down.

People can afford .0001 BTC more than they can afford their fiat savings turning into the equivalent of the Zimbabwe Dollar or Weimar Republic.  It has happened before and in can happen again.  So no one can afford to have all their eggs in one basket for that reason.