I understand, and it is a valid standpoint. I am agnostic in this blocksize debate, precisely because none of us can tell the future. Not FUDding at all, it will be sorted out one way or another, for economical reasons (too much people has too much capital - time, knowledge, money - invested in). Also, living in the present and thinking about the future - in my view - are not exclusive options.
About the Moore's law and Intel CEO: the reason for slowing as i see is that market demand for rapid progression is slowing down - the average consumer PC/tablet/smart phone is "good enough" hardware to be ok already (office use, gaming, design, etc.), no pressure to upgrade every 1-2 years. So naturally, a hardware supplier will say "progress halted". If market demand would be huge for new computing capacity, they would spend way more on R&D, since they can profit on the new product, and Moore's law would hold up.
for example, bitcoin mining was the main drive force behind new chip fabrication development in the last 2-3 years, precisely because it could turn on profit!
Your point is apt, but the current slowing of Moore's law has more to do with the physics of making smaller and smaller fabrication nodes. There is more money flowing into processor development now than ever before.
