I've heard some people say that when SMTs are rolled out, no author or curation rewards should be paid out in STEEM, SBD or SP. I don't think there is any reason to slash the global content reward pool any time soon. Why? Because the current stake distribution is still concentrated into the possession of Steemit, Inc and a number of large stakeholders to a degree that is dangerous. Under the present conditions, a hostile takeover would be easier to carry out than it will be in a few years' time.
Also, the main source of value of STEEM is the fact that it is traded on major cryptocurrency exchanges. Its value is mainly speculative at present. Suppose author and curation rewards were only paid out in SMTs, none of which were traded on major cryptocurrency exchanges. Based on the current abysmally low valuations of Steem-Engine tokens we can conclude that without being listed on the likes of Binance or Poloniex, none of these tokens would have any chance of reaching meaningful valuations.
Essentially, switching to only rewarding witnesses or SPS funding recipients from the global pool at too early a stage would end content rewards on Steem. For an application specific chain whose value proposition is the tokenization of online content creation, it would be a serious mistake. The main token content reward pool shouldn't be done away with without getting a healthy number of SMTs listed on exchanges first. Only a small number of SMTs would stand any chance of getting listed at an early stage.
The fact that the SPS fund pays out the rewards in SBD is an indirect source of additional inflation. When the price of STEEM is high, 10% of the total inflation allocated to the SPS amounts to a large amount of SBD every week. To the extent those earnings are not cashed out immediately but kept liquid, they can add a significant source of STEEM inflation when they get converted into or traded for STEEM when the price of STEEM is low again. That is actually a good thing particularly after Steemit, Inc being acquired by the Tron foundation because it is no longer in any acute danger of going under because of a bear market.
What do you think?