Edit: Are you talking about the proposed forced 100% SP or the current 50/50 split? This comment is written referring to the 50/50 split:
Steem posting is a "free roll" anyway so I see no issue in rewarding people in whatever way the system is set up to do so. I think the system of making participants stakeholders by default is a brilliant one.
I was responding to the proposed 100% SP. We probably crossed signals a bit there.
The 50/50 doesn't really bother me as I see that the SP portion could be viewed as bonus points or as analogous to a portion of compensation employees may receive in company stock (though 50% would be high). However, even then I see merit in the position advocated by @riverhead and others that we should just let authors and users be authors and users, pay in liquid coins (ideally stable ones) and leave the longer-term investing and risk-taking to those who actually want to do that (of course there can be overlap).
As for Steem posting being a "free roll" that doesn't exactly fit with the idea of subjective proof of work or that those rewarded are paid for contributions that voters consider valuable. That sounds to me a lot like being paid to do a job, or selling a service, or something along those lines.
I was responding to 100% liquid Steem. I agree with your point
I think it's brilliant too. But in the name of KISS it doesn't make sense.
Simplicity is great and all but shouldn't be adhered to to break down the strengths of Steem's model like some kind of Blockchain Cultural Revolution.