That being said, I don't see why I should pay more than someone else because I am a good little holder. For me, you are confiscating part of my holdings by forcing me to pay more over people who just started using Bitcoin. Is there any difference in practice if you take away 5% of coins from each address that has unmoved coins from 2010, or if you make them pay a 5% fee to move them? No.
Whether it is done by actually taking them away or forcing me to pay a huge fee to use them, is again just semantics.
Any fee could be considered "confiscation", so the hyperbole is not helpful. And, the fee I am suggesting, 1 satoshi/bitcoin/block, is not "huge". It is very small. It is not 5% over 15 years. It is only 1% every 20 years.
The system has to pay for itself, so fees are necessary. In my view, if some use of Bitcoin has a benefit, then a fee related to that use seems appropriate. You make it clear that there is a benefit to holding bitcoins, so wouldn't it be reasonable to pay a fee for that benefit? Why should others pay for your benefit?