The entirety of the narrative of bitcoin "security budget" is completely a flawed metric to even consider. The idea goes like this bitcoin mining becomes so expensive that there must be ridiculously high fees on base layer to sustain the miners. This prices out individuals having sovereignty over utxos (leaving out the notion of there never being enough utxos available for every human already as is) This idea is flawed by quite a few reasonings. 1) you can not with any certainty make this assumption based upon "math bro" catalytics is itself is not a fucking math problem. Bitcoin being a rivalous digital commodity means it is not exempt from the supply demand dynamics. Theres no amount of "modeling" one can do that would show when this budget problem could come to a head. All models are flawed, some are useful. Models are based on assumptions and used to plot out POSSIBLE scenarios and are in no way facts. 2) that there even is a "budget" to begin with. Theres no section in the white paper that outlines a "budget" set aside for miners to get for securing the network. The block subsidy has forever and always been a reasoning and justification for BOOTSTRAPPING DISTRIBUTION of the coins initially, while simultaneously incentivizing honest behaviors of all actors. The plan has ALWAYS been to move to fees to keep honesty in the network it was never a GUARANTEE. So no we do not "owe" miners a thing. Mining itself is an entrepreneurial endeavor with the individual never having the prospects of returns at all. It has always been a speculative action that the miner themselves has the ability to arbitrage the knowledge they have about asic power and energy knowledge they have over others. The difficulty adjustment will always ensure someone, somewhere with energy and CPU power is profitable to mine bitcoin at ANY price levels. Thats its whole purpose. If miners go out of business because they over leverage themselves this IS NOT a bitcoin problem this is a problem for this specific miner alone. The idea that the biggest miners today will forever be the biggest miners in the future also precludes infinite knowledge of the future which none of us have and could never make. Bitcoin doesnt operate in this vacuum of "math problems bro" its a dynamic system the operates globally with distributed consensus. All actors that engage with it are simultaneously influencing it and being shaped by it. So if fees become to "expensive" only the most highly desired TXs will be prioritized in this fee market. Individual actors will make decisions for themselves what tradeoffs they are willing to consider to transact immediately if need be, by paying higher fees and or other layers with trust trade offs. To say that WE MUST allow ALL individuals this ability is communist nonsense. We cannot know what things the future has not yet created for bitcoin whether it be innovations in energy, mining equipment, protocol break throughs etc. So to say with absolute certainty that there ever was a "security budget problem" shows more ignorance about those that make the claim and a flawed worldview they have of catalytics itself.