There's been a long thread on the North American Network Operators list this week, started by a innocent comment from south central N Dakota requesting a sanity check on the 'best practice' advice for assigning IPv6 addresses to end users .. a /64 for each one ?
"So a customer with a single PC hooked up to their broad-band connection would be given 2^64 addresses?" I realize that this is future proofing, but OMG! That's the IPv4 Internet^2 for a single device!"

Well, not quite ..it's a /64 per subnet.

Then someone else said "isn't this rather a lot of addresses" (implying that we've been scrimping and saving on IPv4 addresses for a long time, since they are a limited resource - shouldn't we be more economical with IPv6 addresses too?), which diverged into a discussion about how many total IPv6 addresses there are compared to the likely total planetary population of people (which isn't at all relevant, but is often used to try to give some notion of scale).

Not needing NATs gets mentioned as a virtue (though the requirement for 6to4 Relay tunnels, to allow IPv4 addresses devices to connect to IPv6 addresses devices, and vice versa, and which are a NAT by any other name, was not)
Not having a NAT does make user tracking easier, if the end system uses fixed rather than random address assignment. Security by obscurity is not reliable.

Yes, there are a lot of addresses available. This is a good thing, since it means that an ISP doesn't have to think too hard; it should get a /32 from ARIN, assign  /48s from it to business sized customers, and /56s from it to domestic customers. Each new network segment (broadcast domain) gets assigned a /64.
Note that IPv6 does not solve address aggregation issues. Since IPv6 addresses are twice the size of IPv4 addresses, and there will be many more of them, aggregation issues will need more attention.

85 messages or so later, Tony Hain's Confronting the Reality of Emotional Denial and Grief' about the cycle people go through : (denial, anger, negotiation, depression and acceptance) in the process of getting to a IPv6 implementation is cited.
People who have only ever used IPv4 would rather not have to change something as fundamental to how they work as the addressing structure.

Further reading
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6
http://www.getipv6.info
http://www.potaroo.net/ispcol/2005-07/ipv6size.html
http://www.cu.ipv6tf.org/pdf/CACH2F0T.pdf
http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/