Yes, another fee topic, deal with it! 
I know, nobody likes to pay fees, nobody! Me neither!
And if there is an exception for sure it doesn't want to pay high fees, so it's pretty understandable that everyone is unhappy about it!
But at the same time, why are you angry at the same situation everyone was believing in it and predicting it?
Every single time a newbie asked what would happen when there would be no mining reward he got the same response over 10 pages, miners will live on from fees, and the security of the blockchain will be generated from fees! And here we are, although the fees are not quite high enough yet!
The last block:
https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000002745f5dc332c3f8373773c05f3507c51bbfb4e402359b
generated :
so in order for the fees to replace the reward, you would need twice as much already, even despite this:
To make it as short as possible, for the network to have the same security as now without a block reward we would need each block to have twice as big fees in the future, that's how things work!
So, are you angry with high fees? Yes, we all are, but, wasn't this the design?
Before anyone comes up with some myths about this, let's clear some things
1) More efficient gear isn't making the network more secure alone, what's making the network secure is the amount of $ to invest to generate that hashrate, so if you think more efficient gear will mean the network will be just as secure but cheaper, it's delusional.
Right now the network is guarded by 400Exahash, which alone doesn't mean a thing, you must translate those into 4 million $2000 a piece machines to understand the security right now, as it takes 8 billion to launch a 51% attack. This also doesn't mean that because the hashrate in 2013 was one million lower you could attack it at that time with just 8000$
2) Cheaper energy or solar or renewable or anything else, again won't solve a thing, even if we run our gear on 0.1 cents per kWh if the reward per day is just $1000 you will only be able to afford 1Gkwh, so anyone willing to spend more than $1000 on energy will have the upper hand!
So, as a conclusion or encouragement or whatever, don't be angry at the fees, they help secure the network, and this is how it was designed to be in the first place, otherwise, we would end up like Bitcoin Gold or Ethereum classic, shitcoins getting 51% attacked 3 times in a row.
And of course, for now, we could actually start using LN rather than complaining, but that would be a solution that involves doing something!
I know, nobody likes to pay fees, nobody! Me neither!
And if there is an exception for sure it doesn't want to pay high fees, so it's pretty understandable that everyone is unhappy about it!
But at the same time, why are you angry at the same situation everyone was believing in it and predicting it?
Every single time a newbie asked what would happen when there would be no mining reward he got the same response over 10 pages, miners will live on from fees, and the security of the blockchain will be generated from fees! And here we are, although the fees are not quite high enough yet!
The last block:
https://mempool.space/block/00000000000000000002745f5dc332c3f8373773c05f3507c51bbfb4e402359b
generated :
Quote
Total fees 3.257 BTC$119,069
Subsidy + fees 9.507 BTC $347,557
Subsidy + fees 9.507 BTC $347,557
so in order for the fees to replace the reward, you would need twice as much already, even despite this:
Quote
Fee span 280 - 8,206 sat/vB
Median fee ~299 sat/vB $15.31
Median fee ~299 sat/vB $15.31
To make it as short as possible, for the network to have the same security as now without a block reward we would need each block to have twice as big fees in the future, that's how things work!
So, are you angry with high fees? Yes, we all are, but, wasn't this the design?
Before anyone comes up with some myths about this, let's clear some things
1) More efficient gear isn't making the network more secure alone, what's making the network secure is the amount of $ to invest to generate that hashrate, so if you think more efficient gear will mean the network will be just as secure but cheaper, it's delusional.
Right now the network is guarded by 400Exahash, which alone doesn't mean a thing, you must translate those into 4 million $2000 a piece machines to understand the security right now, as it takes 8 billion to launch a 51% attack. This also doesn't mean that because the hashrate in 2013 was one million lower you could attack it at that time with just 8000$
2) Cheaper energy or solar or renewable or anything else, again won't solve a thing, even if we run our gear on 0.1 cents per kWh if the reward per day is just $1000 you will only be able to afford 1Gkwh, so anyone willing to spend more than $1000 on energy will have the upper hand!
So, as a conclusion or encouragement or whatever, don't be angry at the fees, they help secure the network, and this is how it was designed to be in the first place, otherwise, we would end up like Bitcoin Gold or Ethereum classic, shitcoins getting 51% attacked 3 times in a row.
And of course, for now, we could actually start using LN rather than complaining, but that would be a solution that involves doing something!
Frankly, I didn't investigate the latest fee moonshot but I guess the reason is still the same: ordinals, brc20 and other shitty tokens. If we extract the number of spam transactions from the total amount, we'll most probably realize the things are not that bad. Yes, we will face the high fees from just the natural, legit transactions alone but much much later. Who know what will happen then? LN adoption, hashrate drop, quantum tech, renewable energy use... who knows? Right now #1 issue is to stop the goddamn monkey tokens, that will solve our problems for now.
