Sorry, missed this:
What does ["However trying to understand the intent by code is unnecessary."] mean?
It means you only need to work with economic disincentives for those who are serious in transacting versus script kiddies.
One man making one-five-ten transactions with, say, a 0.08$ fee won't go "bust" by paying these low fees.
There you go again

I agree with you that bad things are bad. Is your definition of spam "tx X is spam if X contains < 0.08$ tx fee?" That's just an example of a useful definition, what one might look like, because, sometimes, examples help.
Edit: So let's go with the < 8c definition, for giggles.
What would you like to see happen? Change in the protocol, so nodes running it would shitcan all tx < 0.08$ tx fee?
What do you think is preventing Core from implementing 8c min tx fee?
1. Lazy?
2. Haven't thought of it?
3. ? ? ?
Is it in the miners' rational self-interest to include < 0.08$ transactions now?
1. If not, why?
1a. how would raising the blocksize limit change this?
1b. how would lowering the blocksize limit change this?
2. What incentivized miners to include zero-fee tx in the past?
2a. What changed?