Imho one can prove that any PoS solution is fundamentally less secure than PoW.
The argument is very simple : consider a virus that compromises ALL nodes except one.
With PoS an attacker can regenerate/resign transactions from the beginning of time to create a totally fake chain indistinguishable from the real chain.
With PoW an attacker that compromised all nodes except one, still can not create a fake chain.
So PoW is infinitely more secure long term. Any PoS chain has a 100% probability to be destroyed some time in the future
What this means for Ethereum is that the best future is to keep the main chain PoW and let the side chains be PoS. Then you have a nice hierarchy, where the top chain is super slow and secure, and side chains are fast and less secure.
If Ethereum goes PoS, then 10 years from now virus that compromises Linux kernel can infect all or substantially all Ethereum node and destroy the main chain. With PoW the main chain is undestroyable.
For PoW imho the best money issuance rate is to fix mining complexity forever .T
Fixing complexity lead to an equilibrium where long term ETH would be basically pegged to electricity/ASIC costs. As a result, ETH would have much less price volatility. Imho, mining complexity adjustments are a bad thing that leads to ETH price fluctuations.
If Ethereum decides to go PoS for the main chain, a very likely scenario will be that miners will disagree. and there will be a fork that will surpass in value the PoS solution, because the PoS solution for the main chain is inherently less secure.
Another important argument is that PoS will not help much for the main schain. Even if the main chain goes PoS it will still not able to go above 100 transactions per second, due to EVM execution, so whats the point making it PoS then …