Three questions:
- If mining incentive is the problem, isn't it preferable to rise the block size instead?
- Isn't tail emission preferable when there's little transaction activity? Isn't the exact opposite happening on bitcoin?
- Wouldn't a tail emission be a direct attack on one of the principles, which is non-arbitrary inflation schedule?
you can instead force all users to pay a "tail supply fee", for example one satoshi per each 0.01 BTC.
How can you force a user pay a "tail supply fee" in a no hard-fork way? Don't you need their signature?
And if someone really wants to make it a consensus rule, then it can be simply done by getting all transaction fees, and then making a soft-fork that will lock some part of the coinbase transaction into some future block number
Isn't this going to just delay the miners' reward? As far as I understand, you're taking the current reward (transaction fees) and send it to a future block.