Transaction fee will rise, regardless of blocksize

[johnyj]

But those miners on slower network (for example chinese pools) might start to generate empty blocks to improve their propagation speed

That would of course not be good for the network (and we have seen single tx blocks before).

This is why trying to *force* bigger blocks on miners (especially those in China) could backfire very badly (the result could end up being blocks with only the coinbase tx in them rather than the many MBs of txs people are expecting to see as there is simply no consensus rule that requires a miner to include any tx other than the coinbase one which itself is already likely optional because eventually there will be no block reward).

I think the miners who are willing to take lots of transactions and risk the block being orphaned are making some marketing campaign: In order to attract new users, bitcoin must provide some real tangible benefit, low transaction fee is a clearly visible benefit, and when more people are attracted, bitcoin price will rise, then the value of miners' coins will increase by more than 10%, enough to offset the loss from orphaned blocks

[CIYAM]

I think the miners who are willing to take lots of transactions and risk the block being orphaned are making some marketing campaign: In order to attract new users, bitcoin must provide some real tangible benefit, low transaction fee is a clearly visible benefit, and when more people are attracted, bitcoin price will rise, then the value of miners' coins will increase by more than 10%, enough to offset the loss from orphaned blocks

Although that does make perfect sense it doesn't take into account the fact that those miners behind the GCF could simply end up not being able to take advantage of adding in more txs to a block due to the network propagation issues.

A likely result is either more SPV mining (which we know is already occurring and is not good for the network as it can and has lead to forks) or even worse blocks without txs (other than the coinbase).

If the latter was to happen then any advantage of having bigger blocks may simply be countered by the single tx blocks but of course at this stage we don't really know what is even likely to occur.

As far as the constant calls to "make Bitcoin more popular" I think there are bigger issues than the confirmation times (user-friendliness of wallets being a major one).

[BirtRenaldsFan]

It's probably no good idea to do that kind of stuff
 It'll make people less interested in Bitcoin if it's drafting fees just keep going up and up.

[BellaBitBit]

I do not have a problem with increased transaction fees, and the fee you came up with is pretty small. At the end of the day it will still be cheaper than erroneous bank fees for nothing or massive WU fees. I am willing to pay the transaction fee to participate in the ease and convenience of Bitcoin.