An early adopter may have paid less per Bitcoin, but at the time they decided to invest their time and electricity in the system, they had much higher risks as well in terms of knowing whether the currency would ever take off. This continues to be the case. The BTC/fiat exchange rates may continue to rise, or they may not. If they do, the money you spent now may seem low to someone buying BTC later on. In buying Bitcoin, you're taking a risk, assuming you're thinking of it as an investment. High risk should come with high rewards.

In the end, it's a balancing act. For a currency to be useful, people have to have some to begin with. The wider the currency is circulated, the better. If Bitcoins were priced at 1 USD per Bitcoin to begin with, somehow, or had the difficulty of mining new coins been what it is now, few would have taken the risk. Maybe some people end up getting a very high return for their investments. A lot of these people will have done much to help Bitcoin along, though, and many will have been spending their coins at exchange rates much lower than the current ones. I bought some coffee when the rate was about 0,33 USD/ BTC, and that first pizza bought with BTC may well have been among the most expensive pizzas ever if you consider the exchange rates now.

I like your question, I've thought about it a lot.  If everyone "invests" in bitcoin, but doesn't use it to buy anything with or spend it, the value of it won't go up.  Its a paradox:  In order for for your investment in bitcoin to go up, you have to spend some bitcoin.  In order for bitcoin to take on value, it needs to prove its value by being a better medium of exchange than say, the dollar or the euro.  Its a chicken and egg problem.  I do hope that people start using bitcoin, and I do hope it takes on value.  But I'm also committed to using it as a medium of exchange as often as possible.  I'm disbursing bitcoins as rewards for people who spend their money at the shops that I advertise on Bitcoin Bonus.  Gavin Andreesen has probably invested the most time in the bitcoin project, but he's doing a very wise thing, he's giving away bitcoins to as many DIFFERENT people as possible.  I hope to do the same, I see it as an investment in the overall bitcoin project that will make people want to use bitcoin more often.  I do hope that people won't just hoard or collect bitcoins, but find a way to use them.  One way, or another they eventually, will, I just hope it is sooner than later.

There has always been inequalities in the distribution of wealth, I don't see any reason why bitcoin distribution won't be any different.  But if the money flows and is transacted often, and is easy to transact, and there is a known money supply within the system that doesn't change unexpectedly, then we have hope for it to be the most equitable form of money ever.

I think it is BS.

You label a topic "Conceptual" and then put up a whiny, "I got here late so its not for me" sour grapes egocentric argument that is about as far from conceptual as possible ... I say, get a life.

Bitcoin will work because it is superior to the other completely unfair systems out there ... get in now or you'll still be whining miserably when it gets to $100 per BTC.

It would be very easy to do as it is only a statistical analysis of the block chain.

However, it wouldn't mean anything, as there is no way to know which accounts belong to the same people (remember you can own as many bitcoin addresses as you want).

Bitcoin is at least as fair as any other currency out there.

Everybody enters the world with exactly 0 USD, 0 EUR, 0 BTC, and 0 of every other currency in circulation. And everybody needs to get the money to pay for goods and services, either through somebody giving it to them (as especially happens with children), or through earning it themselves somehow.

Bitcoin's method of introducing new money into circulation at least gives it to the people who are processing transactions and keeping the network running well. The way that central banks introduce new fiat money into circulation is to create as much as they want and give it to whomever they want. Bitcoin's method is a bit more transparent, and I'd think more fair.

Yep and the first to get the freshly printed money are banks, investment banks, and other financially well off institutions. I like the fact that with bitcoin the creation process is very democratic or rather egalitarian. There is no supposedly wise and all knowing bitcoin Federal Reserve dishing out bitcoins to only two super rich bitcoin users and saying 'none for you' to the regular miner/user.

look at date of quote from molecular (quote from the future)

Before bitcoin reaches 1,000,000$, those people would have been very very little greedy if they resisted selling their bitcoins.

High prices are a huge incentive to sell.  If someone is capable of resisting the temptation of selling and if he can wait until bitcoin reaches 1,000,000$, then I say he deserves to get rich.

(damn it's annowiing as hell to constantly answer to the same stuffs.  Anyone can put that in the FAQ?)

true, and why did I read "bitrich" as "bitches"?

also: can you please edit your post, you screwed up my quote so it looks like you said it yourself.