I disagree with the stability argument. The haircut rule doesn't apply automatically to savings APR so a change would be expected to be made when we reach that point. Never changing the APR before that point trains speculators to expect that it will never be changed, and then they can be spooked or panic when it does inevitably, eventually have to change.

Investors can be comfortable with changing APR as long as those changes aren't drastic. It is quite normal in other debt markets for interest rates to change from time to time, and crypto investors are even more comfortable with volatility than the broader financial space.

The part of me that favors continued high interest rate is that the cost of dilution is mostly being borne by a) inactive whales from Steem era + b) speculators on Upbit holding large amounts of liquid Hive and HBD without earning any interest. More involved Hive users can benefit from a high HBD interest rate at their expense.

This opens up a potentially tricky debate. Do witnesses have a (moral and/or legal) fiduciary responsibility to all Hive holders? How much space do they have (morally and/or legally) to decide the rates at which investors/speculators get diluted. Do we as stakeholders have such a fiduciary responsibility to other holders of Hive when we vote for the witnesses who make these decisions?