I get gobsmacked that you can justify this (which makes no net difference to demand - there are plenty of multiples of $160k floating around looking for a home with a return) yet you can't justify a change which makes a material difference to demand by exposing more of the supply to competitive bidding.
What's the brain block ?
Unit bias, people like to own at least one of something, so by dropping the collateral requirement of owning a MN, to 250D we suddenly give the opportunity of MN ownership to way more people than before and the capital will flood into the network boosting the market cap. We should also consider re-denominating the value of 1 DASH to under a dollar for the exact same reason, so regular people can easily accumulate DASH and boast they own a whole one, or perhaps several of them.