Isn't the purpose "use bitcoin" rather than drooling about making 100 billion dollars 50 years later?
Not since blocks started filling up.
I doubt that block space is the ONLY (or even a significant) reason that people are reluctant to spend their coins. There may be some hesitancy in regards to accounting, and yeah, if there were some
de minimus amount (perhaps around $1k per transaction and $20k per month) that could be exempted from accounting/taxes, then that could be a step in the right direction.. but yeah, I am not sure if it would incentivize more merchants to start accepting bitcoin/.. Merchant's surely get worried about accounting matters, even though peer to peer we might not care about accounting matters, to the extent that we are able to peer to peer transact without being monitored and/or controlled... so many folks hold their bitcoin directly through third -party exchanges, too... but then what levels of direct transacting might we do with each other? Go out to eat with friends, and then one person pays with a credit card, and then the other directly pays him in bitcoin? Sell some kind of product directly to another person.. .. or even selling a good/service under the table rather than through formal accountings, getting back to merchant interactions, no?
Transaction fees and the potential of delayed transactions add significant friction. I'm not going to litigate the whole block size debate here again but there's no arguing that it has had the effect of reducing the direct use of bitcoin. This was even acknowledged and stated as desirable by those on the side of small blocks and the whole lightning network was premised on restoring some of that liquidity (a flawed application of a reasonable technology IMO).