Thanks for the tags (both @shanghaipreneur and @eturnerx), but as you both also know my dislike of pointless burning as the only mechanism to deflate a highly inflated token - see scot tribes for recent experiential consequences.

Having said that, let's see if it would work on a macro level. The reward pool actually does a decent job at reacting to activity - the only economic activity being the generation of rshares and hence rewards - but what it doesn't do is react to liquidity, or more accurately, the money supply.

We have seen the consequences on Steem of pumping coins into an economy that has an oversupply. So what is need is a feedback loop that can change the minting rate to reflect the coin supply.

In the absence of such a feedback mechanism, burning coins could be used as a mechanism. We can define the coin supply as the ratio of HP over total HIVE.

If this ratio is high, most coins are vested and the burn rate can be low; if the ratio is low, it means most coins are unvested and liquid (and hence cannot participate in the economy) and so the burn rate increases.

We can look at historical values to gauge appropriate numbers and calculate the feedback effect on the reward pool!

On the specific point of fintech programs, the interest generated by the blockchain is far higher than the minting rate; how is it possible for dlease to offer 15% APR on an 8% blockchain? This is a legacy of the Steem economy that Hive has inherited. This can be changed but it first requires a deep and widespread understanding of how the chain actually works.