This is a sound theory and while not the same as my tax plan, it does end with the same results of burning Old LUNA.
I didnt see a plan for UST. Was this idea to be replicated on that chain or were you dropping UST from your recovery plan?
Its funny how our 2 plans could work together. Your plan to tax and burn is part of mine as well, just handled differently.
How will you distribute rewards from the locked tokens? By that I mean it sounds like it’s a shared pool and based on your number of tokens you lock up/stake you get a percentage token of the entire pool. Then that y percent collected from wrapping is redistributed to those that locked up.
If I am right in above then that would mean redistributed funds could be less than what you put in. I’m assuming that this requires continual deposits making the already staked coin holders recieve funds from tbe new depositors. What would happen if a large number of stakers pulled out in a short span outweighing those that are deposited?
Not accusing you of it as I am certain that’s not your intention at all but that was why another poster compared it to a Po**i scheme, which you admited that they could use the same system.
I think your burning and staking rewards need to be adjusted so more of the collected tax is sent to the stakers than is burnt. You burn 100% on regular transactions for example. This is workable and can funtion in a deflacionary way if its set up right.
Also if your intention was to drop UST imo I think that is a mistake, but understand why. It needs to be fixed and will take time to burn and finance it back to pegging. But it is also doable.
Take a look at my plan and lets work together on this perhaps;