Who is going to run a node for a network they can't afford to use though?
Your blocks can be 1KB small so everyone can theoretically run a node, but if it eventually costs $100s or $1,000s to transact that is just as centralizing as gigablockers. Only a tiny cabal of wealthy elite will use it and run nodes.
Average global daily income is $33. You're going to price out most of the world from using it and wanting to run a node.
It's a good point your argument, but since we are currently validating transactions by 8sat/vbit there is no need for any block augmentation, and poor people can still run a node on a raspberry pi and validate their transactions.
On the other hand, the point of layer 2 solutions, is to also reduce the number of transactions at layer 1 to avoid/delay block augmentation.
The art lies in the balance between block size, miners' incentive and layer 2 solutions.
8sat/vbit is almost $1 which can be fairly high depending on the value of transaction, frequency you transact, and where you live. Maybe no need to raise the blocksize right now, but eventually I don't see a way around it unless something changes (maybe CTV or Drivechains?). Even a few months ago when fees were high many were already complaining (rightfully so)
Another problem is that the higher the fees climb the higher the dust threshold...any UTXO value below the threshold will now be gone practically speaking (the value is equal to or less than the fee).
Are many bitcoin users taking advantage of even running a node? It would be interesting to know the rough number of total bitcoin users VS number of bitcoin node runners. I'm sure the percentage of bitcoiners using their own nodes is much lower than one would think.
