The cost of the maintaining the emission schedule is still 100% borne by miners, regardless of what reward they receive. That should have formed the starting point for any "economic analysis" because it's the only quantitively known factor in Dash's economics. If it costs them $100k to mine X days of Dash's emission curve, they still have to dump $100k of Dash on markets to pay for it. (Before MN's even sell 1 single Duff)
Hey Tok, nice to see you're still round here. We are many to miss your provoking thoughts.
Xkcd has read your post above, and here are his interesting remarks posted on one of the too numerous Discords:
Well I read Tok's post on the ANN thread and the guy is a good magician tricking you into somehow thinking the more the miner wastes on Electricity to mint a block the more valuable those coins will be. He is wrong with that. The miners serve to secure the chain and once it is secured sufficiently any more mining does not add value to the chain, but instead wastes money, we are effectively paying for all those gigawatts of electricity! :weary:
Tok likes to play dumb and miss the point that if we juice up the MN ROI more money will flow into making new MNs thus reducing the ROI and soaking up the DASH in the circulating supply as Ryan calls it, this has in the past been shown to raise price and we expect it will do so again, at least in the short term.
We can easily discount Tok's hypothesis with a simple mental masturbation. Suppose GOLD miner A is able to dig up the yellow metal for $600/Oz, but says Oh Fuck it! I want to be able to sell it for higher prices (currently $1750) so he says I will waste money and raise my costs to $800/Oz. Will he be more profitable? Will the gold price rise?
Tok's line of thinking is the tail wags the dog, however, anyone familiar with the animal would observe the dog wags his tail. Tok believes price chases hash rate, but hash rate chances price. We see that on the Bitcoin chain where if there is significant movement in price, the hashrate moves to adjust, in general.
Tok fails to notice though that the Bitcoin hashrate is at a ATH, yet there is a bearish divergence with BTC price, which is one half the ATH.
If Tok were right, then it stands to reason that the BTC price must already be over $100k due to miner hash rate, but that is not the case, so he must be wrong.