I think there's some merit in that idea. I've talked about it in the past and will probably do a video on it soon as well. It truly depends on how it's implemented, but I can see the reasoning behind both sides:

On one hand, reducing the inflation so that users no longer earn HIVE rewards will turn the token into more of a utility and less of a rewards token.. possibly leading to a higher price.

On the other hand, reducing the inflation so that users no longer earn HIVE rewards could make the HIVE token less desirable by the general user base. Will projects make up for that lack of desire for HIVE out of a demand for power on the network (RCs)/voting rights? I don't know if Hive is mature enough for that yet.

I'm firmly on the fence about it. I think there are other economic changes that could be made outside of changing the rewards pool itself. Changing the way voting/content discovery and curation works. We have a system that is far from perfect and the argument that we should just toss it all out the window doesn't hold enough weight in my opinion.

Second-layer tokens have had a huge impact on earning, but like I said - it's early stages. The fact is that all of the second-layer tokens like LEO are far less desirable than HIVE itself. We've changed that mentality a lot over the past year, but I don't know if we've changed it enough.

Posted Using LeoFinance