Agree.
Here is the issue. I think this proposal came out before binance announcement. No one knew that Binance would reduce their burn contribution by 50%. Hence, this was not factored into the calculation that would take care of what #11111 wanted. This 50/50 means that less coins would be burned. While I fully agree that devs development falls squarely on our shoulders we cannot totally rely on the 0.2% tax revenue to fully fund developers and take part in some burning in this initial stage of chain development.
- Volume may fall and hence price of coin will be impacted
- Circulating supply may increase ,again price will fall
- Unforseen issues may arise, that requires more funding ex. TFL may stop their free infrastructure support.
- Also if binance stops burning what will happen to burn?
I have suggested another way to fund the CP from a resource that we own.
Your thoughts would be welcomed.