Yeah, I don’t think issuance is the issue. The issue is giving value.
Decreasing the issuance would lead to the premine having a bigger impact (instead of being diluted) and will make the present easier at the cost of making the future harder:
- If we decrease issuance in the future, it makes being in the registry now more interesting (as people will get more % if the total UBI).
- But it also makes being in the registry later less interesting (new people will get a smaller % of the total UBI).
Decreasing the emission rate looks like a quick boost but which would compromise the future. We need to ask ourselves why UBI would be a widely used token in the future?
One of the answer is that it’d be the fairest:
- Other coins like BTC gives a huge advantage to early adopter, this is good for the early days, but would hinder end tail adoption. Why would people adopt BTC while the supply was mostly distributed to other participants? It’s not interesting to newcomers.
- On the other hand, people joining the UBI movement do not start at a disadvantage, they have some interest to use UBI as it’s a coin that they get a fair share of.
Note that there is still an interest to register early, as the amount of UBI one gets is proportional to the time one is registered. So there is already an advantage to early adopter, but this one is linear and fair to the newcomers.
Something like HIP-14 would enshrine the fair distribution of UBI.