My old dating app profile was short, it just said:
"Looking for a woman that knows what she wants for dinner."
My wife later told me she thought it was a joke.
If the assumed topic is scale, along with an assumed goal of adoption, then you have about 3 options:
1. Bitcoin is only ever used by about 10M people, everyone else uses credit
2. More blockchains
3. Bigger blocks
The practical choice, and the one the market has expressed since the beginning, is already (2), but there is some movement toward (1).
Bigger blocks aren't really communism because everyone actually does have to bear the same costs, and bitcoin is exclusive by costs. As a solution it has a limit that interplays with the fees to make a transaction, and the speed of internet. At some size, it still becomes too expensive for low-tier users, whether by hardware costs, or tx fee costs, or, too slow to keep the network in sync.
The real issue is Ponzi Bitcoiners unwilling to own that title. If they did, then an irrational desire to get everyone on one blockchain would be logically consistent.
In the end, raising block sizes modestly can increase the number of people that can use the original Bitcoin, but it isn't really enough to get us to billions of users, and it is an odd assumption that everyone would use one coin anyway.