It's a good question! So every transaction on the blockchain is public, but the transactions themselves don't say anything about the person using those addresses. But the issue comes when the exchanges make you provide identification through "know your customer" (kyc) rules, then the address that you're using to get the bitcoin out of the exchange is now "kyc'ed" since it's associated with your identification.

So to get around that, it's good to buy Bitcoin from kyc free exchanges too.

But this hypothetical wallet would enhance privacy by having a "mixer" which bundles up a bunch of transactions and "mixes" the coins around so that they can't be associated with an ID. See Samurai as an example. I suggested the name "Mamluk" as a reference and joke about that.

1) Scaleability.

L2 (lightning) fixes this

2) Energy consumption.

It is energy intensive, but that energy is protecting the rules we agreed on in the network. Because everyone is incentivized to produce energy as cheap as they can, most either find unused energy sources, or harnest some wasted energy from different sources.

3) Wealth disparity.

The only people that complain about this are the people that don't learn or don't know how to provide value. The early adopters had to take a lot more risk than most people now. I came to Bitcoin 3 years ago. Should I complain because I didn't give attention to Bitcoin sooner?

4) Economic implications.

It's true that Bitcoin will disrupt the existing system and that it will create a deflationary environment, but these are also positive things. At least people who would've never had any chance to buy a house could do so now. Proof of work should be rewarded!

5) Adoption and regulation.

The same reasons countries lagalize weed, will be the same for Bitcoin. They all need money to get out this debt hole. Adopting the Bitcoin standard is now already showing everywhere that this is the ultimate winning move

I'll try to reply when I'm home