This brings us to what's causing the current ongoing issue of high fees. It's not high demand and it's not miners wanting to charge extra for "keeping the chain secure".
As I explained in the first post and multiple times in the topic, this is a comparison and refers to the period where there will be no more reward, making the miners live on from fees! Again and probably for the last time, it doesn't imply fees will be double, it simply says that in order to have the same level of security you will have to pay up! Simple, as that, you either pay or you agree to have a less secure network, there is nothing else about it, simple economics!
Even now, nobody is forcing you to pay a dime, If you want to get a fast transaction you pay more, in the future you want a secure network you will have to pay, you pay less, and you go down bitcoin gold style.
Got to agree with OP in a certain way, though I think personally it's less the dollar cost of the fee (although this will for a long time be the focus) but the percentage of the tx amount. So yes, miners will need the fees incentive but if the sat cost becomes too high, it makes it less interesting for me.
Exactly, the fee increases in terms of dollar price it isn't gonna be an issue but when the fee needed is about 10 or 20% of the TX size of day-to-day transactions then the system could fall apart, to be honest.
But you guys talk about the same thing, you say that the only annoying thing is the relation between the sats paid in fees and the size of the tx, but being angry about paying
- 1 mbtc for 2 mbtc
is no different than saying
- $40 for a $80 transfer
Besides I really doubt too many would know to say in a split second if paying 17295 satoshi for a transaction for example is expensive or not without doing the math in $.