I've already posted about the problems and solution to Steem's falling price, but there are other authors, like 
Image property of its respective author.
Holding Steem in or out of the system has no actual effect on the price of Steem.
The reason is simple - as long as the single most influential user and producer of Steem is Steemit, then Steem will always be traded like a company share. Add to that the constant printing of new shares (devaluation of the rest) and no information about the actual value of the Steemit network, and you have a serious problem on your hands.
To better understand this problem, ask yourself the following:
If a company of unknown value has 100,000,000 shares (and their number keeps increasing), but only one share is sold on the market, while the rest are held by company investors, are you going to pay a premium to obtain 1 share out of a million, or would you rather pay a millionth part of what you, as a trader, consider the company to be worth now and in the future?
As far as holding on to SBD - it was a huge mistake to introduce a pegged currency, in the first place. The developers couldn't have known how their project and attached currency will fare. This was a psychological gimmick for investors, but a huge risk for the system. And as we are now aware, the developers' expectations were wrong, especially considering the overprinting of Steem. In fact, hard coding economic growth is always wrong. The last time someone tried planning its economy, it changed the lives of hundreds of millions of people (USSR and the Eastern Block; China in 70's).
If a country pegs its currency to another, to make its economy stable, it never:
Why? Because changing the peg speaks of continuing instability and trading with a pegged currency leaves the country's economy in the hands of the foreign exchange market, which always reacts negatively to instability.
There is only one solution to Steemit's problem:
The first one won't happen, because of the way Steemit is designed (see my reply to 
