You do get that his comment was about quite a few decades in the future, and was posed as an alternative to leaving the network unsecured by enough hashrate to defend against 51% attacks, right? Please don't keep making me defend Peter. But that comment of his wasn't the attack some like to make it out as. Nor would it likely refer to anything in his lifetime, as we have block subsidy until 2140. Ironically perhaps, it WOULDN'T offend '21 million maxis for liferz', only 21 million maxis forevererz. That said it'd not be something I'd explore lightly. But it would be better than bitcoin ceasing to securely produce new blocks. Personally though I think if we get to 2140 and blockspace isn't alarmingly scarce Bitcoin will have already failed. Even with the L2's, at least bases on what we currently are playing with. Everyone jumping on custodial solutions or things like Liquid would pose problems.