Is bitcoin transaction fees fair?

[Vishnu.Reang]

i think wallet also affect this fees problem as i see i use xapo and fee is less than 1 dolalr , then i switched to coinomi i got like 2$ fees lol , i dont know what caused this but i think its a bit fair because millions transaction counting each day so blockchain need a bigger fees to cover transaction

Oh, trust me. It is still better than paying $7.50 for a single withdrawal in Bitstamp, or $3.75 for the same in YoBit. Unfortunately, it seems like the era of $0.05-0.10 fees is finally over.

[Ryan Dugan]

I think it is fair to a point. Awhile ago when I paid even 0.0011 btc and it was frozen for almost two weeks till that one day when all the transactions all of a sudden started going through for everyone. Today I moved 0.10btc and paid 0.001 and it took less then an hour so paying that I do not mind. I use to not like having to lose bitcoins for services but now I realize that bitcoin is life and the bitcoins must flow between us all.

[albertvert]

Let us make it this way, every transaction have fixed transaction fee, let us say 2% of the total amount to be sent. So if a user sends 1btc then the transaction fee would be 0.02btc. Regardless of the value of btc in usd, the transaction is still fixed so if you send a small value then you will pay low tx fee ang the same when you send a big value you will pay big tx fee. As for me this is fair enough.

Disclaimer: I am not saying that this is the exact way of paying tx fee, it is just an analogy.

I accept this.why because, if we save our bitcoin and sell it bulk means we will not force to waste bitcoin for interns of taxes.So this wisely. Sell the bitcoin only u need money.

[radjie]

Everyone would want it with a high cost of low cost but it all depends on the bitcoin price so that the number of bitcoin users who make transactions either in large or small amount, Then with the transaction tax costs incurred in large quantities it can be faster to get a confirmation and vice versa if we want a small transaction fee then the confirmation will also be slower it all because of the growth factor bitcoin users who do a lot of transactions and bitcoin price increase.

[deisik]

For me I think it is not right, they should set the standard price on bitcoin fees.

If Bitcoin could process an insane amount of transactions without having to worry about the block space getting occupied in full, then it might work, but not in this case

Fees don't depend on the processing capacity

If this capacity was held in just one pair of hands, it wouldn't work even it were virtually unlimited for obvious reasons. That would be a simple case of maximizing profits by just one player with no competition getting in the way. Conversely, if there were perfect competition, then the fees could be however small even if the processing capacity was limited, for example, by the network bandwidth. As you can easily see, these two extreme cases show it pretty clear that processing capacity as such is irrelevant to fees. In other words, fees depend on other factors, most important of which are costs and the level of decentralization (or the lack of such)

[aarons6]

the issue isnt the tx fees being too high, its the tx times too long..

if everyone refused to pay high tx fee and just paid the min, the fees would be low.. but the tx times would remain the same..

[1Referee]

Fees don't depend on the processing capacity

If this capacity was held in just one pair of hands, it wouldn't work even it were virtually unlimited for obvious reasons. That would be a simple case of maximizing profits by just one player with no competition getting in the way. Conversely, if there were perfect competition, then the fees could be however small even if the processing capacity was limited, for example, by the network bandwidth. As you can easily see, these two extreme cases show it pretty clear that processing capacity as such is irrelevant to fees. In other words, fees depend on other factors, most important of which are costs and the level of decentralization (or the lack of such)

It's funny how you are just ignoring the real point here, and just blindly try to force through your own vision. Block capacity is extremely relevant in relation to the transaction fees. The capacity, or better said, the lack of capacity, is what has been driving the fees in the higher direction. Everyone is trying to get their transaction included in the next block, and due to the lack of block capacity, you'll either need to outbid other transactions with a much higher fee, or you'll be forced to wait for the block(s) after that. If capacity wasn't relevant in relation to the fees, why would any entity initiate a spam attack? It's not for nothing that I suspect miners from heavily contributing towards the massive spam attacks to boost their fee income.

[katepagava]

Ofc, we would like it to be much more loyal. But i think it is quite reasonable

[Shenzou]

the thing is poeple are always complaining that the fees are high but the truth is fees have stayed the same its the price of bitcoin that gone up, because the price skytocketed we havent noticed it, and to be fair since bitcoin has become really popular the miners have more work to do and more transactions to confirm, but still some wallets take high fees and transactions still slow.

[GreenBits]

Fair? The term is quite subjective, however if you're trying to send a million dollars for a little more than a dollar in fees, then why the hell not? Besides, receiving bitcoin wouldn't even require you to confirm your identity as long as the sender sends the btc to the correct address. No invasive identification required, just send the money, pay the fees and you're good to go. However as for micro-transactions, I will be honest and say that sending under x at the moment is an inefficient exercise

Essentially, you have to look at the other benefits of the technology to justify the fees. The low fees used to be a feature

[sobsitesearch]

the thing is poeple are always complaining that the fees are high but the truth is fees have stayed the same its the price of bitcoin that gone up, because the price skytocketed we havent noticed it, and to be fair since bitcoin has become really popular the miners have more work to do and more transactions to confirm, but still some wallets take high fees and transactions still slow.

Correct, i think the transaction fee was reasonable because of the value of bitcoin right now, before the transaction is very small due to small value of bitcoin that is why fees was based on the current value of bitcoin, i think the main concern is the slow transaction to be confirmed even we choose the higher fees, that is they need to adjust to make users continue to used their services.

[chixka000]

i think wallet also affect this fees problem as i see i use xapo and fee is less than 1 dolalr , then i switched to coinomi i got like 2$ fees lol , i dont know what caused this but i think its a bit fair because millions transaction counting each day so blockchain need a bigger fees to cover transaction

You are right that is the reason why blockchain should enlarge their systems capability. I can just how gpod life would be with a lesser fee and a higher convertion

[DOGE12321]

The funny thing is that if you do think it is unfair, then it is partly your problem. The miners in our network can be forced to confirm transactions for a lower fee if the average fee was lower. However, at the moment, the average fee is very high. Everyone wants their transactions to be confirmed first and thus, the average fee goes up. This, in turn, causes a general increase in all fees. So in a sense, the transaction fees are fair. But they still stand as a huge barrier for the further development of Bitcoin.

[Schuyler]

Everyone wanted higher bitcoin price and we achieved this but another problem become transaction fees. When bitcoin's price was low, we had to pay also low fee and now when it rised, we have to pay high fee in bitcoins and plus that high fee is more higher with current price. Is this fair? The higher the price, the more money miners have with bitcoin exchange.
To my mind when price becomes high, we have to pay low fee and when it becomes low, than fee has to be high. To my mind it had to be done like this from the begining.

Transaction fees are included with your bitcoin transaction in order to have your transaction processed by a miner and confirmed by the Bitcoin network. The space available for transactions in a block is currently artificially limited to 1 MB. This means that to get your transaction processed quickly you will have to outbid other users. I think,they should set standard fees for every transactions.

[ceremonita]

I really don't know who's deciding the fees, yet they are not fair. 6-7 months ago, we would pay cents in big transactions. Now we pay dollars in small transactions.

[Sithara007]

I really don't know who's deciding the fees, yet they are not fair. 6-7 months ago, we would pay cents in big transactions. Now we pay dollars in small transactions.

That era is over, I am afraid. But there is good news once again. SegWit is now clocking at 82.6% support. If the block size is increased to 2 MB, then the confirmations are going to be much faster, and the fee will once again be lowered. But it is only a temporary solution. After a few months, even this 2 MB block size would prove to be too small.

[Doms]

If fees are to be made fair, it should be based on how much one is sending and not by how big the size of the transaction is. Makes it simpler and easier to understand for the common man. Somewhere between 3-5% of the amount to be sent seems fair to me. And people would know exactly how much they will need to shell out for the transaction fees.

[deisik]

Fees don't depend on the processing capacity

If this capacity was held in just one pair of hands, it wouldn't work even it were virtually unlimited for obvious reasons. That would be a simple case of maximizing profits by just one player with no competition getting in the way. Conversely, if there were perfect competition, then the fees could be however small even if the processing capacity was limited, for example, by the network bandwidth. As you can easily see, these two extreme cases show it pretty clear that processing capacity as such is irrelevant to fees. In other words, fees depend on other factors, most important of which are costs and the level of decentralization (or the lack of such)

It's funny how you are just ignoring the real point here, and just blindly try to force through your own vision. Block capacity is extremely relevant in relation to the transaction fees. The capacity, or better said, the lack of capacity, is what has been driving the fees in the higher direction. Everyone is trying to get their transaction included in the next block, and due to the lack of block capacity, you'll either need to outbid other transactions with a much higher fee, or you'll be forced to wait for the block(s) after that. If capacity wasn't relevant in relation to the fees, why would any entity initiate a spam attack? It's not for nothing that I suspect miners from heavily contributing towards the massive spam attacks to boost their fee income.

You don't see the forest for the trees

If there were complete decentralization (read perfect competition), the limits in the processing capacity as such wouldn't and couldn't affect the fees once they are established at a certain level. Bidding up the fees in these circumstances would be meaningless since transactions would still be confirmed by first come first served basis in the long run. The effect you describe would be temporary since chronic underprocessing would eventually level out "supply and demand", and then "first come first served" at a certain fee level (just like it happens with prices). That's why miners have to constantly build up their spam attacks to bid the fees up. It is mining centralization (read monopoly) that makes fees higher

[ladydark]

The transaction fees is not fair.I could remember those days when transactions got confirmed very quickly with very low fee.I used to send my earnings from abroad with very low transaction fee.But now,recently i sent btc from my wallet to my loalbitcoins account to sell.I didn't change the fee manually in my wallet.Thats the greatest mistake i done.It took around two weeks for me to receive btc.That was ridiculous.

[madwica]

The transaction fees is not fair.I could remember those days when transactions got confirmed very quickly with very low fee.I used to send my earnings from abroad with very low transaction fee.But now,recently i sent btc from my wallet to my loalbitcoins account to sell.I didn't change the fee manually in my wallet.Thats the greatest mistake i done.It took around two weeks for me to receive btc.That was ridiculous.

The fees i think not fair for the corresponding hours to received your bitcoin that is your point, but for the fees for every transaction regardless the time frame i think that is good since value of bitcoin is too high they wanting to make the wallet a live that is why they need to have increase on fees to compensate their services. That is the only thing that we can do to help and support our local bitcoin wallet.