The only thing that really makes Bitcoin different than the existing banking and financial transaction system, is that it is censorship resistant. It is that way because it is decentralized so that it cannot be shut down by pinpointing a few select points of failure, and putting the clamps on them. That's because it's peer to peer, and you verify transactions you receive yourself, and don't rely on some other entity to tell you if the transaction you received is correct or not. If running a node gets too expensive for most users to run, then they have to rely on third parties to verify transactions for them, like Coinbase, or Bitpay, or Blockchain.info. They then get power to force through even more centralizing pressure, strengthening their position until they are irreplaceable. What happens then when some powerful states come knocking, and demand a fork to redistribute all coins from a revolutionary party's wallets? Or that all fungibility features be removed? Or that the mining reward schedule be extended forever, to "stimulate growth", aka building a bubble during their rule so they get elected again? We would have completely lost our censorship resistant money. It's only when you at least have the option of verifying your own transactions, that the system is resistant to corruption.