We have users who vote for others also

Sure, no one would claim that 100% of rewards are wasted, which I think is what you are trying to say here (not exactly the same, but close). An awful lot of those apparent votes for others are actually paid votes or (explicit or implicit) vote trading which is closer to self voting than actual rewarding of merit and added value. Not all, certainly, but a lot.

We have a development team via steemit inc that doesn't have a marketing budget

There are other blockchains worth more with no marketing budget. They don't even have an active development team at all, or barely have one.

In reality, things like development teams and marketing budgets can be important, but don't always translate into price. What does translate into price 100% of the time is supply and demand. And BTW it is difficult for Steemit to have a marketing budget when they have very little in the way of funding and ability to cover costs, which is very much a function of the price.

One final point. We have an enormous marketing budget, that is probably, as a percentage of market cap, among the biggest in the entire marketplace: the reward pool. That is nothing other than a marketing program. It is clearly not being spent effectively, so much so that it almost isn't even recognizable as a marketing budget!

It should be a massive super power that promotes Steem into the stratosphere and beyond. Of course it isn't. Why not?

Recognizing it as such and downvoting when you see rewards that don't further the aims of marketing would go a long way toward righting the ship.

You also upvoted each one of your comments 460 dollars each

Odd, but I don't remember the context.

I'm a lot more interested in what is going on right now though.