I may have generalized a bit too much about the wealthy...some of them got Bitcoin and some not. I agree with you on that, even though wealthy people on average have more chances to be exposed to financial revolutions and, on average, they tend to have more financial knowledge and capital to heavily enter a new financial investment. Therefore they accumulate more in less time even though they somehow arrived relatively later at the party.

I agree on the fact that Bitcoin changes how value flows into the economic system and I deeply like the idea of 'value generated by the producers should belog to producers'. No money printing, no favoritism, no political bs. Agreed. My point was different, btw. Socialism doesn't relate too much to what I said, so please read carefully next time. I wasn't advocating for social equality, equality of outcomes or some other bs. I do not advocate for things nor 'hope for something to happen', I look at the environment and I make hypothesis, then I test hypothesis agains the reality and see what happens (may be called scientific method?). However, I simply stated that a bitcoin based economy will somehow replicate the inequality schema we are used to see now. Here is why this will happen, in my opinion:

a. Bitcoin OGs and holders from the first 10/15/20 years are the early adopters, they had the opportunity to find out about bitcoin, earn bitcoin and opt out from fiat. Like it or not, they will be the 'wealthy people' in terms of sats and purchasing power. b. People that got into bitcoin later or people with less capital or people with literally no savings were (are and will) not be able to stack sats, save in sats instead of fiat. They may be exposed to Bitcoin technology, run their business with bitcoin etc, however they are not able to save sats because they must spend relatively quickly their sats in order to pay for their current expenses.