One of the common objections I am getting from Bitcoin supporters from my discussions on reddit is that POW somehow makes distribution "fair" and that POS is unacceptable because the early elite stay rich while no one else has a chance to get into the system because "new coins are not being minted for distribution."
I view this as a misunderstanding of the economics. Inflating the coin supply doesn't give an advantage to the latecomers, it only redistributes the wealth from the early adopters to other entities (entities who are not necessarily the latecomers). The stake in the system will still eventually be distributed to many people, because that is the way the system grows in adoption and thus in value. If the initial stakeholders just sit on their stake and never sell or spend that value, the system will never grow in value (what is the point of holding a majority of a worthless currency?). This is not a real issue though, since as the market cap of BTSX goes up, early adopters will want to start selling/spending portions of their stake to actually consume real goods/services with it.
Some may have some misguided notion of fairness where they think inflating for the sake of inflating is still a beneficial thing (meaning if we cannot give the latecomers an advantage, at least let us punish the early adopters). Without trying to argue about whether or not that is "just" I like to simply argue that: one, you can still achieve such economic policies in DPOS as well through inflating the shares and distributing them to other entities; and two, in POW you are forced to do the wealth redistribution to ASIC manufacturers and power companies (you cannot choose to at least give the money to productive purposes such as charity, research, infrastructure, etc.).
You can see some of the relevant reddit discussions
here and
here.