The proposed limit keep falling. 
Users want larger blocks, faster confirmations and lower fees. Miners want smaller blocks, faster propagation, higher fees. Devs want larger blocks but a long term solution, ideal balance between fees, spam and blockchain bloat.
Users do not have a voice in this "democracy". It's a miner's game and devs has to win their support. 2M is the lowest it can go, what excuse do the miners have now?
Users want larger blocks, faster confirmations and lower fees. Miners want smaller blocks, faster propagation, higher fees. Devs want larger blocks but a long term solution, ideal balance between fees, spam and blockchain bloat.
Users do not have a voice in this "democracy". It's a miner's game and devs has to win their support. 2M is the lowest it can go, what excuse do the miners have now?
At the moment, miners might be interested in keeping the blocksize small, but that's only because they're effectively subsidised by the block reward. But over time, as the block reward diminishes, they'll want to allow more transactions. Miners understand that artificially limiting the number of transactions has a knock-on effect that also limits the quantity of transaction fees they could be receiving. In future, they'll want more fee paying transactions to make their endeavors profitable. I still think it's likely they'll go for the 8MB proposal because 2MB means we'll be having this same debate again in the not-too-distant future.
