So the rich get richer and the poorer get poorer with tax.
Not everyone can afford to run their content creation blogs/dapps/witness/nodes/communities fully out of pocket without supplementing whatever they are involved in with what it generates from it on Hive.
Taxing people decreases the incentive for people to spend money on improvements to make their blogs and vblogs better and more relevant. Those that can only afford to run witness/nodes/other infrastructure with Hive would be taxed on something that is most likely not covering the costs as it is to do. Many projects that only generate anything from their blogs will struggle even further may no longer see it worthwhile to even use Hive with the endless effort that is required for cents.
Taxing people like a government enriches a few at the cost of growth for everyone else. Then you add on the actual tax burdens from counties people live in and suddenly with a 20-60% tax from counties, the 5% to power up, 10% tax on rewards, 10% unstack you are fucked. That is before benefactions are taken from posts which many will have to require for dapp/community and who knows what else one day such as node usage.
For the many reasons above I only see whales that don’t plan on doing much wanting to opt into such a system for the most part as they can just do nothing and collect the biggest part of the pie.
Perhaps the exchanges would love to power Hive and eat up most of those rewards since they could easily power down when needed. While also sharing the reward with their day traders who will not be moving coins off exchanges since that puts them at risk of down wallets during price spikes and not having stop loss /sell orders in place.
RC at this time is worthless due to the lack of innovation and driving people to a use case for it. Along with how efficient the blockchain has been made it's quite a mountain of a task just to move the needle on.
The poor don’t have to get poorer if they hold for longer, in fact they get rich.
I don’t see it like that, people will do what they want to do, it might only take longer, what might take anyone to accumulate and spend in 2weeks will probably take 4weeks or 5, which is 4-5weeks of time to even grow more.
Exchanges will not want to power up peoples funds at will, what happens when a user needs their funds, if they will go the route of powering down at a whim then they will be the ones paying 10% fees for the instant PD,.....if my tokens are in an exchange and for some reason as slimy as they powered up my funds so I can’t access, best believe I’m never going to that exchange again when my funds are out, and I’m never going to stop talking about it. Binance did, and got away with it, there was no fees to pay. However if the gains they make by powering up users funds outdoes the fees they incur to power down then the system is flawed.
I doubt the rewards they will share to traders will be minute compared to the rewards traders will make from trading themselves......especially after paying 10% fees to power down
It's funny you have the view because when I was game theorizing this, I thought the exact opposite. Who stays powered up the longest? It's usually smaller accounts. Sure they power down some but not all. Who power down the most? Whales. Whales are either in or out. I can put a dozen examples on this very chain where when a whale power down, it's because of a investment reason, and they clean slate and move on.
Who pays the most in this system? Whales do, of course. They pay 5% just like everyone, except when they leave, they don't get that 5% back, and all the smaller accounts are sticking around benefits from their very large contribution.
A small account pays the least to enter yet stands to gain the most in the form of ROI.
It's a flat 5% that all pay and all get back if they remain in HP. If your rewards are in HP and you don't instant power down but opt for the 13 weeks, you pay nothing. I fail to see how the small count is harmed here?