Do you think a refund option would be better than a burn option for excess funds in the worker Proposal pool?
By voting to send the excess funds to a null account, arent we effectively voting to destroy tax dollars? Who would ever vote in favor of destroying money that was taxed from them?
In the future event of a development drought or a gridlock where we as a community cant decide on what to do with the funds, is a vote to destroy the funds realistic?
I just don't see people choosing to do that, ever. Imagine of the federal government asked the people if they wanted to destroy a surplus of tax money? Wouldn't happen.
So I suggest the following:
1 - We need a cap on the proposal pool, so it cannot inflate over a certain size. In case there is gridlock in the community and no consensus can be reached, we need a built-in safeguard to stop it inflating nonstop.
2 - We need a tax refund option where the community can vote to return a percentage of pool funds back to those who were taxed. That would enable us to lower the pool amount without dividing the community with a vote to destroy tax dollars.
I feel like those two things would greatly aid the sustainability of the program.
Just my thoughts, thanks again.
Posted using Partiko Android
In money supply theory, burning some of the supply is the same as refunding it proportionally to the currency holders. But despite that, I tend to doubt that most people will vote for burn proposals. The more likely result when people don't want to spend funds is that they'll just have the funds stay in the treasury fund account (i.e. vote on a proposal that sends the daily budget for that day back into the treasury account).
One interesting mechanism that I've seen suggested was to have all inflation allocated via an extended form of the proposal voting system. This would allow voters to allocate how much of the total daily inflation goes to all forms of rewards (curation rewards, post rewards, stake rewards, witness rewards, etc). I doubt we'll see anything like that soon, as it's a bit more complex than what we're doing now, and also more politically controversial, but I suppose it might happen eventually.