Addressing Ethereum value capture

What is confusing to me is why everyone still keeps going forward with e.g. EIP 7762 etc…

I have commented elsewhere that to me it isn’t obvious that EIP 7762 fixes the fee accrual entirely: A simple L2 security and finalization roadmap - #6 by TimDaub IMO EIP 7762 just fixes a problem with fee accural, but it’s entirely not holistic enough to fix it completely. Unless ofc, the authors of EIP 7762 have ran the math and concluded that it does, but didn’t publish it, or I’m missing smth.
Where is the math that shows that with EIP 7762 we get back to e.g. at least 2B USD fees accrued in 2025?

IMO the elephant in the room is that we have had between 2B and 9B USD in fees for Ethereum stakers/miners, and now that seems to be far out because with DA, transacting on Ethereum is just so much cheaper but same security. What’s the argument against ETH going to 200 USD because it has become 10x cheaper to transact? That we’ll grow 10x?

OK, but where is the user growth? Grow the pie shows that active addresses stagnate

Tbh I’m actually open to the idea that we’ll go to 200 USD an ETH. But I’ve been too fearful to reallocate any of my positions yet.

Idk. I’m not on X or FC, but here on the Magicians and on Ethresearch I don’t see a lot of debate happening tbh. When you e.g. look around, it is generally assumed that we should just blindly increase the blob limit. You can see that even in Vitalik’s post itself. He doesn’t motivate the blob limit increase until I asked.
I also don’t see anyone deeply criticizing the strategy, e.g. that congestion pricing plus a research effort to reduce congestion produces no fee accrual practically. That’s literally why I started to be active here again.

Not witch hunting. Just asking a normal question so that both of you state your positions, which you now did so I’m happy.