I think the current curation/author ratio is alright. A 50/50 ratio will make more sense if there are more active users with dolphin-level vests. Changing it to 50/50 too early is going to shift the balance by too much; creating a "rich gets richer faster" situation, thereby widening the wealth gap.
What I personally hope to see is a strong, large and active "middle-class" group. A move to 50/50 seems to me that Steem is deviating from that course and I will probably be very disappointed by then.
On whether we had organic growth at the start, the answer is certainly a no. I dare to say more than 90% of early joiners were here for the money. I was here for the money too. However, I eventually grew to love this platform because of the potential I see. The interactions I get here also seem to be deeper and more meaningful. The dApps being built here are also getting better and better.
Overall, I am still optimistic of the future of Steem. As long as there are more development on the underlying technology and users' onboarding, I think we are still on the right track
I agree with you partially. It might result in more stake being redirected to stakeholders, but keep in mind that new users need to have an incentive to keep the stake they've just earned. The idea of distributing the currency, for the sake of distributing and in return hurting the stakeholders, who are not selling, is foolish.
Why should people keep their rewards in Steempower instead of selling them, if the rewards are not worth it?