2) Sure there may be problems with centralized pools and ASIC manufacturers, but the money supply and transactions can still all be public despite these problems. In other words, we are still worlds above a privately issued currency system (fiat). We aren't talking about abuses such as issuing arbitrary amounts of monetary units for ourselves here, so it really isn't fare to compare this kind of centralization with the kind witnessed in fiat systems.
Theoretically if there is enough of Bitcoin's "transaction processors" centralized geographically in one country, that country's government can threaten them, and make the "processors" censor some transactions that that country's government does not like.
True, and reason for concern. However:
1) This shouldn't be compared to the problem of private issuance, or fiat money
2) Users already have tools to evade this kind of censorship, such as alternative chains, coinjoins, pseudonymity, stealth addresses, ...