1) Transaction fees are extremely low. I can currently store $1M for 100 years protected from supply inflation and counter party risk for a fee of around 0.0002

1) Transaction fees are extremely low. I can currently store $1M for 100 years protected from supply inflation and counter party risk for a fee of around 0.0002%. 2) Do you mean "replace-by-fee"? That only affects unconfirmed transactions, in the mempool. 3) There's no waste of energy - smaller blocks provide greater decentralisation (through cheaper HW) and greater robustness (through lower BW). Both are _extremely_ important. 4) Not an issue if you pay around the market rate for your transaction. Even if you bid far too cheaply, you can use RBF mentioned in point 2 to accelerate your transaction. 5) Microtransactions would absolutely destroy the decentralisation and robustness as they would require far, far greater block-sizes. Without a robust base network the value of bitcoin would be at risk. Small transactions are best suited to a layer-2 network such as Lightning, Fedimint, or even centralised payment rails. These will gain more attention as bitcoin proves itself as a store-of-value which is required of any asset before it can be used as money. It sounds like you'd be more interested in forks like "bitcoin cash" or "bitcoin sv" (which are both failing extremely badly relative to bitcoin!).