The issue with going at the author rewards is, ultimately, the value all comes from the authors. Developers build the "coliseum", but its the gladiators (authors) that get the crowd cheering.

The problem here is that everything is being designed to go after author rewards. The beneficiary fee takes from the authors, which means that every business planning to build a platform is going to take a chunk out of the author's income. So, its not really 50/50, businesses will take their cut out of the author's 50%.

The reason why authors needed that 75% was because businesses are going to take from that 75%. For example, dsound takes 25%, so that means any musicians/podcasters are only going to receive 25% of the rewards. This stinks of the same financial betrayal of content producers that youtubers and webmasters have experienced with ad revenue.

Corporations ruin everything and gut operations by catering to investors over customers. Steem seems to be headed down that same path. If anything, we should take from the stake interest. If quality content producers become attracted to Steem the stakers will see positive ROI regardless of the inflation.

The inflation should not be a problem for stakers at all because Steem is nowhere near the size it has the potential to get to be. The problem is that Steem is unattractive to top level content producers, and the real reason that is so is because its overly fixated on appealing to investors and not content producers/consumers.

I think @yabamatt said it best when he related Steem to Wordpress. Steem is meant for businesses to create social sites all over the web and take a cut of the author funds. We have to leave enough for the authors to actually bother.