I'm very interesting to see how would a fee market become if the block size is full at 1MB. It seems many people are afraid of seeing that happen, but what if it makes bitcoin more valuable?

Imagine that the mining fee per block becomes higher than 50 BTC, e.g. 0.0125btc per transaction for 4000 transactions per block at 1MB, and average transaction will be larger than 1 BTC to not feel the pain of fee. That is about 6 dollar per transaction at today's exchange rate, almost at the same level as today's international bank transfer fee, but still lower. So it won't impact two largest user group of bitcoin: Long term value store and international remittance

However, the result of 50 BTC fee per block is: In a 4 years' period, half of the coins will be collected by miners. Currently many people do not trust bitcoin because they doubt that it is a pump and dump scheme: Early adopters sitting on millions of coins, making lots of campaigns to merchants and users in an effort to dump them to late adopters and profit. However, if late adopters can become a miner and process transactions for early adopters and collect equal amount of coins like early adopters, then this monetary system is much better designed and will not result in inequality long term wise. Because mining is almost free entry for anyone, this will attract more users, more than a low fee will do

In fact, this is already a concern when the next reward halving is coming, means over 75% of the coins have been mined. What would people do when a gold mine is depleted?

The argument for a large block is to reduce the fee for average users, but what if a small block is better for bitcoin's adoption?