There's always been a fixed amount of BTC, so wouldn't the demand side--the dependent variable-- be the cause of the illiquidity? Right now, it seems to me like institutional investors are the movers and shakers in Crypto, with respect to BTC; they're the ones dictating the price action of BTC by gobbling up and holding available BTC, thereby creating the illiquidity issue.
Also, I understand and agree with the premise of BTC as an liberating alternative to fiat and institutional currency, but the more valuable BTC becomes, the more it moves away from its original function. At this point, no one in their right mind is going to be ordering pizza or engaging in day-to-day transactions with BTC. In other words, people are clamoring for BTC not to use as an alternative to fiat currency, but as a way to store value. Fiat currency might be subject to inflation and institutional manipulation, but its not going to be replaced by BTC anytime soon, not when it is more sensible to HODL your coin because it is an appreciating asset. The tech behind BTC might change society for the better, but I think BTC itself has become lost in the sauce as it is beyond the reach of most and is on the path to become a Wall Street darling.
...