I respectfully disagree on both points. The point of Bitcoin is a disintermediated system of rules without rulers where users cannot be debanked - a peer-to-peer electronic cash system, as it is called in the whitepaper. This remains intact as long as we can reliably advance the chain and include transactions with credible neutrality.

The tweet and discussion about "security budget" is a concern regarding exogenous attacks - non-interested players looking to sell proceeds. Instead a fee-heavy operating paradigm results in internal threats from miners squabbling over the highest transaction fees - vested players looking to accumulate BTC. I'm not sure what the answer is, but MEV is a very real threat we need to think about and consider mitigations for. Within a few halvings, it will likely be rather problematic.