According to coinmarketcap.com the current market cap of STEEM is approx $1,433 million while the current market cap for SBD is $42.8 million. That means the SBD debt is less than 3% of the STEEM market cap. This is tiny compared to most companies that operate in the world today at much higher debt ratios.
Do not compare companies that produce products and have a stable cash flow from it, with a Steemit that produces nothing, except of the constant issue of its own shares. The business of companies does not depend on the price of their shares, but the "business" of the Steemit depends linearly on the exchange price. So these are incomparable things.
Besides, if STEEM goes back to $1 it is likely that SBD will go back there too so the debt burden would scale accordingly.
I see you do not understand how the algorithm works. The debt of Steemit is always equal to 1 dollar for 1SBD, regardless of its price on the exchange.
The problem is not this, but that the SBD issue algorithm is a deal with investors and speculators. They buy it instead of Steemit, because it's a rare asset, it's not enough for all. To then pump the price, and make money on it. If, with an increase in the price of SBD on the exchange, its issue is increased, this is a violation of the deal. There is no point in accumulating SBD, if its emission can be increased simply at the will of some witness. And this means that SBD will not buy speculators, and the authors, after it falls below $ 1 instead of selling it on the exchange will launch its conversion into liquid steem, and then sell it (steem) on the exchange, putting constant pressure on the price, and and the size of the pool of awards!
So you better think twice before offering to support witnesses who violate the algorithm !!!
You are correct, the debt is only owed at a rate of $1 worth of STEEM. So it is in fact far less than 3% and more like 0.5% which is miniscule. I disagree that the Steemit produces nothing, it produces content and it's value is in it's knowledge base and it's network effect.
Really it seems like you've used the debt argument as a smokescreen and are spreading a bit of fear about it but your REAL argument is about preserving the "contract" with the speculators who've been pumping the SBD (and intending to dump for profit). Sorry, but I have no love for those people, nor sympathy should they get burnt in the process. If they weren't aware that the network could increase supply by a mechanism that is IN THE DESIGN of the crypto they were speculating on, then they haven't done their due diligence. There is no violation of any algoritm if it's part of the system design.
SBD is coming back down now as it was always going to do and I do wonder how many people have been taken in and burnt by this pump and dump.