A tail emissions rate of 0.03% or less annually seems acceptable.
#!/usr/bin/env raku
use v6;
multi sub inflate($n, $r, $y)
{
my $m = $n;
loop (my $i = 0; $i < $y; $i++)
{
$m = inflate($m, $r);
}
$m;
}
multi sub inflate($n, $r)
{
$n * (1 - $r);
}
sub MAIN(:$rate = 0.0003, :$years = 100)
{
my $purchasing-power = 1;
my $inflate = inflate($purchasing-power, $rate, $years);
my $output = qq:to/EOF/.trim;
After $years years of inflation at a rate of {$rate * 100}% per year,
purchasing power is {$inflate * 100}% of what it was initially.
EOF
$output.say;
}
All else equal, a 1% annual rate of inflation costs you over half of your purchasing power per century. Even a 0.1% yearly inflation rate charted out over several centuries results in a collapse of purchasing power. This level of inflation practically requires investors to take countermeasures, like searching for alternative stores of value...
Expanding the supply on demand through on-chain governance in a way stakers can profit from, while sacrilege to “digital gold”, would be more palatable to me than rates of tail emission higher than 0.03% or so.
I’m only commenting from the perspective of investors concerned over debasement. 0.03% annual inflation reduces purchasing power by about 7% every 250 years.
Expanding the supply on demand through on-chain governance in a way stakers can profit from, while sacrilege to “digital gold”, would be more palatable to me than rates of tail emission higher than 0.03% or so.