Let me explain it with the following analogy too.
Bitcoin miners are paid by transaction fees and the block reward.
Safe Network farmers receive payment from people’s transactions (for data storage) and from a reward from the Network Reserve (the monetary inflation).
If the transactions fall in numbers and it is not enough for all farmers to make a profit, or at least equally, they will start to stop their farms. In this analogy, the Foundation intervenes and starts making transactions.
I am well aware of that. I think the reason David doesn’t want the sections to keep a reserve is because in this way there’s no reason for them to be attacked and hacked.
As long as the price rises, it does not matter whether there are decreases in the number of transactions, they will be offset by the rising price.
By the way, if you think about it, the Safe Network and Bitcoin are very similar if you think of farmers as miners who process transactions. The output of the miners are blocks, the output of the farmers is data.
The difference is that Bitcoin can exist with 1 miner, ie. it is able to shrink, while the Safe network can only shrink to a certain size. Therefore, it is absolutely mandatory to have a reserve of tokens for moments of reduced transactions.
And while we are on this topic, I think that the current economic model does not take into account that there will be people buying the token entirely and only for speculation. These people will sell the token during a bear market to speculate on the possibility of buying it cheaper later. Bitcoin and alts often fall 85-95% down in price, I don’t think Safe’s current economic system can survive in such a situation.