He claimed that this specific set of people is seriously impeding the adoption of Bitcoin. As they have the ability to shock the entire system with sell/buy. Avoiding a centralized authority controlling the system is one of the issues that Bitcoin seeks to overcome. If there is a large demand and widespread adoption, a supply shock would then occur.
However, the issue is still present and may be more significant than the use of fiat money. Unless Bitcoin holding changes in any way. I believe the system should be changed such that each person is limited to holding a certain quantity of Bitcoin.
I think that this will hinder widespread adoption. What do all of you think?
Happy Christmas 🎄🎄
Your suggestion constitutes making the Bitcoin network centralized. Making a limit on an individual's bitcoin holding is nothing but dictatorship. This goes against the ideal of freedom, Bitcoin wanted to convey. Bitcoin at its current state of distribution is almost perfect. Besides, people who put more effort into Bitcoin are rewarded accordingly. Your suggestion discourages extra effort and will most probably hinder the growth of Bitcoin because your idea caps the opportunity and capacity of every individual to acquire more Bitcoin. You are removing the competition that gives life to the marketplace and the growth of Bitcoin price and value.
You wanted to avoid manipulation but instead, implement manipulation at its core.