I want to figure out how we get to a point where that user is earning $100 or even $1000.
That will literally never happen. There is no scenario where a single quality creator increases average earnings so much (unless Steem goes to 100USD today) under any circumstance. The platform isnt built that way.
You have a an upper ceiling on what a creator can earn and i think i could do a break down of each creator group to tell you exactly how much they can earn pretty easily.
Due to the very nature of those that do redistribute their votes you can never have anyone stand out. The "very best" and the "decent enough" will earn around the same with the focus on consistency and content quantity.
If you consider that, then thinking that someone will have such a jump in earnings (or even something close) when you cut author rewards across the board doesnt really make much sense.
What i expect to happen is an initial curation surge by proposal supporters that will dwindle after a short time when people realize that curation is damn hard and not very fun. Some quality creators will get a few more votes from kevin and the gang which wont amount to much due to the massive cut, the curation philosophy and because we all have friends (orcas as well) we like here that arent amazing creators, but can make a shit ton of photos daily (lol); smaller accounts, dolphins, minnows etc. wont change their voting behavior.
Vote selling will still be a thing. A few curation services might pop up eventually that will either maximize curation returns with "questionable practices" and vote subpar content that maximizes returns.
I sincerely believe that this will be the case. An initial shift in behavior from proposal supporters to prove that the proposal was right and a swift adjustment to reality.