Well, why would it?

I'm in my 30s and i still haven't found the answer to that question! I think we can't all have the same amount of money like the start of monopoly, but at the same time, wealth in-equality is just insane! Like, if i ran the planet, i would say, ok.. You can't be a billionaire! sorry, you don't need a billion dollars! lol WTF are you going to do with a billion dollars!? you can keep it after we fix Detroit and bunch of other shit. So, everything over a billion must go towards fixing, updating social infrastructure  and helping the least fortunate among the populous. When all of that is done, where there are zero homeless in the streets and at least the have a respectable place to stay at night and are not hungry, then maybe we can raise that bar on a limited basis. But until then, NO jack-ass, you can't have a billion dollars! you can have 800 Fucking million! are you still not happy?!?!?! FFS.

anyway, that was my nightly rant...

This bears repeating. Remember, that the fiat 0.001% doesn't need to work for their money because it is printed especially for them at your expense. With Bitcoin, the 0.001% must hire you if they want anything and pay you what you are worth at their expense. It won't take long for the wealth to even out if there is a level playing field.

What the figure you quoted is missing is that:

a) A person may be holding private keys to more than one address
b) An address can be 'owned', or rather accessible by more than one person

The point you make about there being a 1% is still fair enough though, just felt compelled to make those observation.

That comes down to the scarcity model.  If Bitcoin was theoretically better distributed then it might be worth less or wouldn't had gone anywhere (as it would had been dumped to death). .  It's only a guess as we've not really seen an egalitarian or a fairer distribution model exceed yet.

In this sense 1% doesn't necessarily mean 1% based on calculation, it is a figure of speech for a distribution model. Kind of like a Zipfian distribution.

The point of Bitcoin is that you wouldn't need to buy 10 bitcoins, you can have a fraction of a bitcoin if you so wished.

600 bitcoins at $1 a piece still costs the same as 1 bitcoin at $600 a piece.

Bitcoins - is not communism, but only honest capitalism. It gives you ability to be safe, secure and state-independent. Do you want more?

That isn't true at all.  The wealthiest individuals DO control the network, in exactly the same way as wealthy individuals control the fiat money supply.  A few very large (in comparison to us anyways) companies not only control the majority of the network hash power, but they have the ability to control our ability to contribute to the network by withholding the tools needed to hash.  Assuming you do not have the resources to design and build your own ASICS, you can only mine in so far as they allow you to, in an amount they control, at a price they set.  In fact I would argue that they have a tighter control over bitcoin than the various wealthy fiat owners do over fiat money supply.

Only governments and regulations can solve that problem. Only when there's a country offering enough incentive to remain there while adhering to rules that may force you to pay a lot of taxes (because of your high income) things may change for the better!