It's only sustainable if price can raise at a rate slower than average blocksize. I don't see how that's possible because a belief in rising xaction fees has the effect of pushing demand forward or in other words causing people to transact now rather than later which causes the blocks to grow. A self-fulfilling prophecy.
So either you think a fee market will emerge, in which case you contribute to the capacity problem or you think it won't, in which case you hold off and allow the market to think demand for blockspace is lower than it is, which creates less incentive to fix the capacity problem. How are you gonna take advantage of a non-jammed network without contributing to the jam?
The capacity problem will not be fixed if it is not seen as a problem and it won't be seen as a problem if the exchange price is high. Miners will continue to profit selling a shitty inferior product because you assholes keep buying it. I can't blame them. You can't buy as much blockspace as you used to for the same amount of coin. You can't xfer it as fast for the same fee. It can be censored by the PRC. One Bitcoin is a smaller amount of total market cap than it used to be. Even if it's undervalued, it's not nearly as undervalued as it was at $350, so why the hell are you buying now? Got a tax refund burning a hole in your pocket?
And anytime BillyJoeAllen posts about a supposed "block size armageddon", all you need to do is post this as reply:
It doesn't matter what % of blocks are full you stupid fucks. All that matters is what the average transaction fee is. Since there is no minimum transaction fee, the blocks are basically designed to be full at all times eventually even if you set it to 100MB blocks. Segwit + hard fork in 2017 = 3.2MB blocks. Then schnorr multisig on top of that should lower transaction sizes and increase TPS further.
If blocks were designed to be full, then how come they weren't full until recently despite effectively zero fees? cripplecoiners never answer that.
why would people do transactions simply because there is space? the fees were low for a long time because the blocksize was always more than big enough for the number of transactions. now that they are near full, the fee increases as competition for space increases. eventually, if the size doesnt increase, demand for space will lead to further increases in the cost to transact.
i dont think they were designed to be full, as that would require a dynamic blocksize. without dynamic blocksize, they are either not full due to low transaction count, just full when it reaches equilibrium, or over full when there is too much demand. The only way i see this becoming a problem is if demand is so high that transaction fees become intolerable, though i suspect that could happen very fast if transaction fees are dynamically increased as blocks become fuller.
It doesnt matter if most users dont see it as a problem, it will be fixed so long as the devs see it as a problem and miners agree. since when do decision makers take joe soaps opinions into account when deciding whether is an issue or not. Facebook users never considered how much data they were creating or how it would affect their beloved facebook did they? but yet facebook and their devs still pre-emtped the issue and solved it, regardless of whether the users considered it an issue or not.
i dont see why bitcoin would be any different. facebook over loaded = facebook goes down. bitcoin over loaded, transactions get very expensive. this isnt a consideration that the vast majority of users will take into account ever so to say that blocks should be full simply because they its cheap to transact is wrong. to assume that users will front run others by sending transactions sooner because fees might increase soon is also wrong. to think that most users have that kind of foresight is wrong. to think that users will send transactions willy nilly just because they can do it very cheap is wrong. you are thinking about this as if people are rational beings and will always optimize their use of bitcoin and plan ahead, but people just arent like that.
and I am happy to report that my "high priority" transaction, fee of 0.000113, was included in that block 
