Having 30 Million in Curation BLURT ensures that not too much BLURT ever ends up on the market.
If that 30,000,000 were held by others, they might power down 100% and retire in 3 months. Having it in Administration means that there won't be an exodus of BP like happened with SP after the Justin Sun issue.
So if we use the housing Bubble model to look at how Bubbles work, we can compare each 1,000,000 BP to a house. There are 400,000,000 BLURT in Circulation.
If 30,000,000 is held by the platform for curation, that means 30/400 of our housing Bubble houses are bought.
Now say I want 1,000,000 BLURT, so I buy it so I can invite friends and create my own little Curation Pool. So 369 houses left.
That may seem like a lot, but say we make a Bitcointalk.org thread, and start inviting people. Now, say in the next 2 months after the thread is made, 100,000,000 BLURT is bought by BTC, LTC, DOGE, ETH holders. 269 houses left.
So, firstly, that influx, 100,000,000 BLURT being bought, raises the price. Right now maybe $5,000 per day is spent on BLURT.
STEEM and HIVE have Millions in Daily Trade Volume, and we don't even have to scratch that amount of volume to get $1.00 BLURT.
Now, you are a Blurt blog user, earning maybe 2,000 BLURT Max on a post today, which is $20.00
You see that all of us have been buying BLURT getting 50,000 and 100,000 and 1,000,000. And it's going up to $0.10, and $0.50, and sure you are doing fine as an author, but you definitely have incentive to Buy.
And when new users join and on their first day they see it is $0.05 and $0.10 the day they join, they will have a whole different perspective from you. Some will just want to Author, but some will want more.
Losing SBD is not a loss at all.
Thread pending.
30M BP in the hands of people with skin in the game, is better than 30M BP held / controlled by people with no skin in the game. Their only skin you could argue, is another form of sweat equity in the sense that they might need to spend a few seconds going on seotools to check for plagiarism which is certainly not worth the proposed 2 lots of 100% votes from 1M BP.
Further, you are employing short time horizon thinking. There already was more than 30M Blurt in the hands of people wishing to power down. The only reason there isn't a full on exodus, is that a lot of those who powered down STEEM as a result of Justin Sun didn't get much if any BP at all.
But the biggest assumption you make which is wrong, is that there will only ever be 400M Blurt. That is wrong. The responsibility carried by stakeholders is that they have a matched say in where inflation goes to. Even if all of the BLURT in existence now were locked away and curating, there would still be the coins coming into existence from inflation to contend with, and this is the crux of the matter. Where those coins flow.
If they are reinforced by value creative productivity, then we have a positive economic feedback mechanisms. If they don't - which is basically what i'm contending - then they have negative economic feed back which is realised over time by the market valuing the token lower. Ebbs and flows aside, that remains to be seen.
You seem to have misunderstood my post, I never said BLURT was capped at 400M.
Please reread it.
And you know BLURT is not really very active yet, right? The current activity is extremely low compared to what it will be.