*edit for incorrect styling*
>Check out how much time it took Reddit to reach its current status. Reddit, after 4 months of its existence, was in a much worse position than Steem is now.

I don't think Reddit had a "working" example to copy. Steem has. So yeah I'm surprised they didn't push it further from the start. But you are right, let's wait and see.

>Incorrect. The (big fat) whales can't be paid unless the the author gets paid. And the author gets paid significantly more (3 times more) than the whales.

My point was that you need votes to get paid, even a tiny amount. So people who want to get rich target the whales. Why not, but that a bad side-effect on the quality and diversity of the subject.

I have. No mention of who provides actual money, or why. I know the Steem flows freely, and where it comes from. The question is about actual money, I think, and is not answered as far as I can tell.

The value of Bitcoin is precisely that it is difficult to make more. Steem comes too easy to be much good as a currency.

Perhaps you could point me to the place in the post where it says who buys Steem and why. That is what people mean by "where does the money come from". This post misses the mark on that, completely.

@knircky Thank you i'm tired of the nonsense too

Ponzi scheme: middle man takes person B's money and gives it to person A and calls it "earnings." Stock market: middle man takes person B's money and gives it to person A and calls it "earnings." Please explain the difference to me.  No hatred here...I wanna learn.

absolutely @knircky say right, the people who think or comments that stock or cryptocurrency like bitcoin or Steem is ponzi actually jealous or the people of third party like ponzi,scam and hyip schemes.

Steem has a business model.  Just like Bitcoin.

@orly has it nailed, I think. Steem can only have value if people buy it. It cannot have value from being handed out for posting, curating, mining, etc. In the long run (other than speculation), the only reason people would buy Steem is so they can distribute them amongst content creators. This amounts to paid speech, aka advertising.

I agree that when a stock pays dividends it's not a ponzi scheme because you are getting a cut from the companies profits.  But for"non-dividend" in the so called "growth stocks" the money comes from other people.  Yes there might be a product that company is making but ultimately the "growth stock" is growing because someone other than the company is willing to give you money for it because they expect someone else to come along and pay them more ie ponzi.

I have had this conversation with a lot of "financial people" who always seem to get annoyed and state..."but the stock is growing because the company is doing well." I would buy that idea only if the price of a stock was directly tied to its companies profits.  Yes for the most part this happens but enough times in history (Enron?) this has not been the case. 

This "money being handed down... In the hopes of ever increasing 'value'" is the same thing that happens with every cryptocurrency (bitcoin, litecoin, ethereum etc.) before steem.  I think people musunderstood my point...I am in no way talking about steemit.  Here the investors money is used to turn writers/curators/users into investors themselves.  It's an amazing take on the entire situation.  But one that without new "real money" (read fiat) will continue to lose value.

I guess my point was just create a dialog around ponzi **vs** "growth non-dividend stocks"/bitcoin **vs** steemit 

In no way did I mean to offend anyone. 

*Full disclosure I own "positions" on bitcoin, ethereum, lisk, dash and a few others...So I have definitely bought into the scheme!*

But there are some people who simply hate capital market and do not distinguish.
It is an attitude, nothing reasonable and it can not be changed.

What gives the US dollar value? Wood pulp? The ability to print more? What gives the USD value is the same thing that gives anything else financial value, perception. The government being able to print more dollars at will is a negative, a debasement of the currency. Cryptocurrencies with limits on how much can be produced don't have this problem. Ironically you've done a good job of describing some of the problems inherent to fiat currencies which some have turned to cryptos to avoid.