50% is allocated for investment and 50% is used to meet basic needs. I think that is enough reason but in our country bitcoin is not a payment method, it is still an alternative investment asset so here 100% is only in the form of fiat salary. Luckily the signature campaign salary is in satoshi and that is considered enough for me, at least as long as it lasts then it can be an investment and the fiat salary is used to meet living needs.
Those who have job can use monthly salary for daily living while they can accumulate Bitcoins from signature campaign here. It's a kind of DCA accumulation because you are paid weekly salary in satoshis and we are very much clear now that how beneficial it is to accumule Bitcoins in DCA manner. If we only have rely on job then we have to spare some money for investment purpose but being part of a signature campaign here reduces that pressure from our job salary.
Maybe there's no issue if, after you receive your salary from the signature campaign, you convert half of it into your weekly budget. It's similar to the DCA method, where you keep half as your long-term investment while spending the other half on daily needs.
Fortunately, it would be advantageous to have another source of income, aside from accepting Satoshi.
This way, if you have a job that pays in Bitcoin, it will remain untouched in your wallet for accumulation purposes since you have cash to spend.
I believe there's nothing wrong with accepting Bitcoin as payment, whether for a large transaction or a small one.