@Danny: Of course nobody knows what the future will bring. But the whole issue of size only makes sense under the assumption that it will.
I'm not sure what you mean by "the whole issue of size only makes sense under the assumption that it will"
If block size is limited, small transactions will be pretty much impossible.
Correct. That's a very real possibility, and I'm ok with that. Apparently a lot of other people are not. Since Bitcoin is a consensus system, changing the block size requires overwhelming acceptance from all the miners AND all the users. A simple majority isn't enough. There are quite a few developers and outspoken individuals that seem to think that the overwhelming majority exists. They better be right or we'll have quite a mess on our hands.
Personally, I find that it's safer to just leave the block size alone, but it will be interesting to see what the future brings.
A miner will always pick a larger transaction over a smaller, because for him it does not matter whether the user is giving a 1% fee or a 10% fee. Only the absolute amount matters.
Correct, a miner should always choose to confirm the transactions that pay the absolute largest ratio of bitcoins to bytes.
Of course most people don't want this to happen.
Well. Some people don't want it to happen. Some don't care one way or the other. And then some would prefer that it happen. Where the majority lies is perhaps debatable, but I suspect you are correct. The real question is:
"Is that majority overwhelming enough to force a consensus?"