That's a hard question, and I think the answer is ultimately up to statistics, but it also depends strongly on how we measure it. Like, if a woman is spending more than a man because she's buying groceries for the whole family and also stuff for kids, it shouldn't count as her overspending because someone's got to do it, and she's not spending the money on herself. Another potential way of measuring it could be by only counting that is spent beyond basic expenses.
Here's some data I've found:
"Single men outspent single women. Men spent an average of $41,203 a year as opposed to $38,838 by women."
It's something, but only for those single, and the different is insignificant.
There's also a slideshow on spending by categories, and women spend more on average on some things, whereas men - on other things.
Then there's also the thing called 'the pink tax' which is used to explain why women spend more than men over their lifetimes because of how products for women are priced higher than similar products for men.
Overall, my impression is that there's little evidence to support the idea that women are more economical than men or vice versa. It depends on the circumstances and varies from one person to another.

I'd be concerned about a 13% interest rate, I agree with Poker Player on that one.
The op did mention the fiat currency losing value, but I'd still be very careful with actually making that deposit. If it's losing a lot of value, it's important to consider whether it might suddenly lose way more, but you won't be able to do anything with it because of the conditions of that deposit.
With Bitcoin, you can always sell when you feel like things aren't moving in the right direction, so it's less risky. I'd rather invest in Bitcoin than give money to a centralized entity without being able to withdraw it for a fixed amount of time.

I don't understand why they got a permit, either. They say they need some sort of info to get confirmed first, but I don't think it's a reasonable request. And by creditors, they mean the victims of Mt.Gox or is it something else? I assume it's the victims, but it can technically be about some companies who bought the debt or whatever.
DaveF correctly noted that the at least some payments will be done this year, so that's good, but overall, I don't think too much should be required from the victims in terms of documentation. Getting their money back is long overdue.

I think it's a lovely list the op made, I'm not surprised it got merits from 4 different people.
I think some people can trade altcoins if they are good at trading in general and confident that it's a good idea for them, but it will be a disappointment and devastation for many if not most.
The cautious sharing part is something many people seem to not get when they focus on spreading the information about Bitcoin everywhere they can. It does make it look suspicious, and people have to be open to it for it to have a positive impact.
I'm not sure about Twitter, I personally barely use it and never check Bitcoin info there. To me, this forum is a good place for that stuff. But the rest of tips are good.

I don't know where you live and what kind of finances are required there, but in general, $100 for monthly expenses isn't enough for anything, even for a developing country and even if you don't have to pay the rent... Are you confident that such a low amount of money can cover your basic expenses?
Electrum's a good choice and DCA is a good strategy, but I'm concerned what kind of life quality you can have with $100 per month (it's good there's also $50 for personal stuff, but that's still very low). Also, in that case, I don't think you need $100 per month for emergencies.

I don't disagree with those points, but I just think they're far from a full list. One major thing it misses is that sometimes some people remain dreamers while others become entrepreneurs because of a major difference in finances and life circumstances.
Another important thing can be the economic climate of one's country, which is sometimes very hostile to new businesses and at other times very welcoming.
I'm sure that there are other reasons as well, and I think we should be more aware of the impact of inequality.

People here have already pointed out that there's a significant difference between Bitcoin and trading with Bitcoin. Trading is an involved process and requires some skills and understanding of the market, as well as of the risks because trading can easily go wrong. Bitcoin is a currency which can be used in different ways. Simply buying Bitcoin and holding onto it is much easier than trading it, and using Bitcoin for payments is also an activity that involves much less risk than trading.
So it's not about discouraging people from using Bitcoin, I think it's a precaution meant to help people avoid losing their funds because of being unaware of what they're doing.

Bitcoin's a solid investment, and I do believe it's way safer than altcoins. But at least two things should be pointed out.
1. Bitcoin has already experienced immense growth, and expecting it to rise 50x, 100x is unreasonable. Even a 10x rise in one bull market sounds very unrealistic to me, but 50x is unrealistic even over the course of a few bull runs, I believe.
2. Altcoins are very risky and tend to fail implementing whatever they were supposed to implement. However, many of them do experience a lot of growth, even if it's temporary. So it's understandable why it can be tempting to some investors.
I've just opened Coingecko and sorted the coins there by the biggest gain over 7 days to find an example. The first one's Rollbit, and in grew 50x since April 2023, so in less than 2 years. That's just an example of the kind of thing that's highly unlikely with Bitcoin these days but can still happen with some altcoins.

Op, DCA's a good strategy, so I think it's good that it's the one you're employing.
This forum has different people, and of course some are afraid of investing in Bitcoin, unsure about its future, but I think most people here aren't like that.
Bitcoin, like any investment, is a risk. There's no guarantee that it will recover this time as it did before, or that at some point in the future it won't stop recovering. Investment also requires money, which some people don't have.
Now, to answering your questions.
I try to save up some of BTC because I believe that it's a better choice than fiat, considering that Bitcoin tends to grow in value over time, whereas fiat gradually loses its value by design. I'm used to this forum, and I like that I can learn new things here and see people with very different opinions trying to explain their views. I look at the merit numbers, to be honest, when it comes to evaluating the claims people make, but of course it's not a perfect system. And here are some reasons an accomplished person might stop using the forum: a person may die, lose access to account, become not interested in discussing cryptos online

I guess seeing the dynamics with 'plus' and 'minus' signs would also be interesting. But even like this, it's a useful table that illustrates that we've had a fairly calm year. Unfortunately for those who hope that Bitcoin will become less volatile over time, though, it doesn't look like a consistent trend yes, as 2020 and 2021 were more volatile than 2016, for instance. Moreover, while volatility is the lowest over the last decade, I wouldn't call these numbers "extremely quiet", as even 30-40% change of average value in one month is actually a lot.

12. Grant Dawson
11. Joe Pyfer
10. Joaquin Buckley
9. Drew Dober
8. Ion Cutelaba
7. Alexander Hernandez
6. Karolina Kowalkiewicz
5. Chris Gutierrez
4. Johnny Munoz
3. Kanako Murata
2. Mateus Mendonca
1. JJ Aldrich

NOT go the Full Distance 5

Game 1:  32, 27'
Game 2:  32, 19'
Game 3:  32, 38'

Since there are no links to any research, I assume these are just things the op believes are important qualities of Bitcoin millionaires?
A question like this would require extensive analysis for reasonable answers.
I've looked online and only found very generic data about approximate amount of BTC millionaires and info about some particular individuals.
But my intuitions are very different from those of the op. To invest in Bitcoin, you need to have money and knowledge, which mean a certain privilege that tons of people simply don't have. Then among people who fit into this picture, there are those who can allow themselves to live without touching the invested funds, those that can reinvest if they fell a victim to a scam, and other similar things.
And maybe after that come other traits, but to learn those we'd need research.

The tax concern is surely relevant in many countries, but not everywhere because there are countries where taxes and tax evasion aren't considered a big deal. There are also countries that already set out their legislation regarding cryptos, so it's clear whether they are subject to taxation or not, and, if yes, how that works.
Unequal wealth distribution is a problem, but I think it's about much more than corrupt governments. It has deep historical roots related by discrimination on the basis of race, sex, and sometimes social status or other factors. Some people can't afford to hodl, but if a person has some funds to spare, it's possible to save up a bit, and do that in Bitcoin.
As for #3, having we been in the dip for a while now? The price is around 60% below the ATH, and that's low enough, in my opinion.

It's lovely that op's friend put effort into making a strong case for Bitcoin, but I think that not investing if one doesn't believe in something is the right choice. I mean, yes, we can now see how Bitcoin went way up since that time, but as a long-term life strategy, taking a risk when thinking it's going to be a failure is not worth it.
I think that instead of focusing on regret, it's important to find ways of moving forward and learning from the mistakes of the past. Perhaps a lesson here is to be more attentive to thoughts of other people, especially of close friends who seem passionate about something.

Bitcoin is a dominant cryptocurrency and will remain this way. If you mean compared to fiat, there are probably different ways of making an evaluation of which currency is currently dominant. If it's by global reserves, that's the USD, and I don't think Bitcoin can beat the USD in this regard. But being a currency of global reserves doesn't mean being widely used by the population. If it's by the number of people who use a currency as their main currency, the USD has 350 million people, whereas I think it's safe to assume the Chinese Yuan is used by way more people thanks to the sheer population of China. That reminds me of another criterion, the volume of cross-border transactions, where Yuan and the USD fight for the first place.
There are technically no cross-border Bitcoin payments because there are no borders, so it can't win based on that. Beating 1 billion Chinese Yuan users is also unlikely any time soon.

If it's a dream, and you're already at $15k, I see no reason to let go of that dream and exchange it for something smaller, less relevant to you personally. So I'd try to accumulate the remaining money and go with the original idea because I believe that people should follow their dreams when it's possible to do so. Sure, it may not work out, but at least this way I'd know that I tried, whereas if the smaller option doesn't work out, there'd be more regret.
But another thing I'd reflect upon at this point would be whether I actually want that particular business and why.

I'm not fully committed to seeing Bitcoin as an investment. To me, it's like my personal reserves, which I don't touch when I don't need to but use when I feel like it's appropriate. As for gambling, I treat it as a form of entertainment more than anything else, so it's just something that has a different purpose. If we're talking about earning money, that's what jobs are for.
Bitcoin didn't do much harm to me, and the same is true for gambling. But of course, with other ways of using them, both can be risky and dangerous.
The op says gambling has done more harm than Bitcoin, and I guess I agree, but primarily because Bitcoin has been around for less than two decades, while gambling has been around for thousands of years.

These so-called curves are a matter of scale and perspective. It's easy to misrepresent the situation this way and to argue for various incompatible positions.
It's impossible to know how far-reaching Bitcoin adoption will be. We might be near a start, but it can easily be somewhere around the peak.
It also misses important differences. Gold is something many people own but don't actively use, unless it's jewellery or something. The Internet is something people don't own but actually use, and tons of people use it every day for many hours. Bitcoin is more mysterious in that regard and somewhere in the middle, since it can be used, but sometimes people just own it, much like gold.

I see no fear in a person who's predicting that Bitcoin will rise well above what it's worth right now. I think he meant "priceless" as a metaphor, meaning that it'll cost way-way more than it does right now.
Op says Bitcoin's already priceless for them, but it's the subjective kind of immeasurable value attributed to Bitcoin, whereas Kiyosaki is encouraging others to invest in it, so it's safe to assume he means objective rise of value here.
However, I don't think it's an accurate prediction. I think a CBDC, unless being made compulsory, which I don't deem possible in the USA, can simply exist as an option, without impacting Bitcoin positively or negatively.