Your subnet is no more uniquely identifying than a (non-CGNAT) IPv4 address; if 32 bits identifies which router you're using (whether that's your home, coffee shop or whatever) then a 64 bit identifier doesn't make that router any more identified.

In the typical IPv4 setup, your network gets an IPv4 address. Everything in your network is trivial to group.

In the typical IPv6 setup, your network gets an IPv6 prefix from which client devices use randomized and rotating IPs. Everything in your network is trivial to group.

How long the network-identifying address/prefix is stable is purely an ISP design choice - some keep them as long as possible, others force a change regularly.

yeah, like when you have a /32 IPv4 dedicated to your private subnet; it's the same.

Why use IPv6 if you are going to hand out IPv4 addresses?

People know why. Even if a few really get 32's, it's PR. The endgame is the same.

This is a critical path item for removing the ability to have 2 party value transfers. The power at stake is incalculably valuable.

What do you mean by " Even if a few really get 32's, it's PR."?

The vast majority of IPv4 connections get an IPv4 IP (= a /32), CGNAT is pretty much only used by providers that don't have another choice and has various downsides for users too.

Obviously, it's temporary. Handing every possible IPv4 user 2^32 IPv6 addresses is a worse than pointless gesture. It's an 10^9 scale changing of the subject.

IPv4 not having enough addresses is why it's valuable. It's impossible to arm band every human with 32b.

EDIT: I'm comment limited for the night. @efzx: Seeing "google" in the same sentience with "does not have anything with tracking" is pretty good stuff.