Yeah, only up to a certain point because if people use custodians and lightning, miners receive very little revenue from the occasional channel opening and closing. 

That's why the miners supported big blocks in the block size wars. 

Decentralisation is maximised by minimising the total cost of using Bitcoin in a permissionless way. 

Total cost = capital cost of a node + transaction cost x number of on-chain transactions. 

Currently you can run a node with a $100 second hand computer. At a fee cost of $1 per transaction you can do one transaction a month for 4 years before the cost of the transactions exceeds the cost of the node. 

If the block size was increased to reduce transactions to 10 cents but the node now costs $1000 it would cost more overall. 

But if fees go to $10 per transaction, you can only do about 2 transactions per year before the cost of transactions exceeds the cost of the old computer you are running the node with. This could be managed with just opening one channel to a fedmint and splicing once a year, but that comes with some tradeoffs. 

Where to go once fees continue to rise, say to a theoretical $100 per transaction?