Bad argument because you stated the problem. Insider trading is bad because of what you pretty much said. Liquidity is only important when considering how fast you want to buy or sell your stakes in a company.
If an insider knows a stock will yield him 10% profit and has a month of time to buy stocks, even if the daily volume is 500k shares. They can gradually buy shares at 20k/day, and once that news becomes public and the liquidy goes up they can sell off all of their shares in one shot pretty much. And people just just got news of the information would think that their stock has a 10% upside, but since someone already beat them to the 10%, they aren't going to get anything.
As sharp as the decline is, I am not sure if this is a buying opportunity. Most investors made big gains so more can easily afford to cut their losses.
I keep hearing realestate and low rates, so that may easily be an outlet for the money to go to. I guess we'll see.
I try not to buy too much into what he says. What he says is usually too philosophical, so the reader is making their own sense of what he says and gives him credit. He is almost a dictator the power people give him.
He actually went as far as to tell investors beware of investors not from the valley. So people don't steal in the valley as they do anywhere else?
If you do all of your work "perfectly" and can't do it any other way at any expense you may just have anxiety issues. Quitting doesn't do away with it.
This entire story says to me that you are a selfless person that wishes to be more selfish. Be selfish. It's cathartic. You don't have to go overboard, but buy yourself pizza and don't share. Go to a movie and not invite anyone. Baby steps.
The best way to go is getting preorders to fill orders. You won't have to deal with leftover inventory, or debt. You'll also know in advance if people would buy your product.
Crowdfunding seems to work best with hardware startups.
The idea is less about losing coin, and more about concealing wallet size from people that don't need to know about how much money is in a bitcoin wallet.
My idea is more along the lines of instead of pulling out a wad of money you're only pulling out $50 at a time.
Me personally, I don't mind the wallet amount being public because for things lie fundraising it keeps people honest.
Something that also just came to me, instead of having one large sum on money in one wallet. Who says it can't be distributed and broken down in max wallet sizes of $50 or so. $50 is a common number no one should really care too much about. So there goes your concern about being able to see wallet size. If something costs more than $50 group multiple wallets into the transaction.
What can be done I just thought up is adding another transport layer to bitcoin. And breaking up and distributing the wallet's contents "sum" among strangers into something like a checksum. Then on transactions bringing the chunks of checksum partially back together.
How it's broken down can vary. you have to remember though, if you are buying something for $10 all that needs to be verified is that you have $10 or more for the next step.