The long-time "pure monetary" coins like Bitcoin, Litecoin, Bitcoin Cash (whose chain goes back to Bitcoin's origin), Bitcoin SV (whose chain goes back to Bitcoin's origin), Monero are all around now for a long time. As a consequence, their emission rate has already fallen relative to the number of circulating units (e.g., they all have low supply growth rates). Therefore, the one thing all these coins have in common is that they spend relatively LITTLE on hashrate relative to their market cap. Monero actually launched after Dash, but its emission rate tailed off much quicker than Dash's. As a consequence, it spends relatively little on hashrate compared to Dash... about 3.2% inflation. And yes, they incidentally are all PoW because that was the only well-understood consensus mechanism by 2014 when all of them had launched. All of these coins have supply inflation of 4% or less. It is the attractive supply inflation that helps them maintain their value. If the Bitcoin network made the decision to increase the inflation rate to 12% per year, it would begin to underperform Bitcoin Cash and other competitors, guaranteed.But you are advocating a further revision of the reward ratio away from miners. This is where our perspectives diverge because your model of where the value is is not consistent with what Dash investors have bought.
At the moment the priorities you've identified focus on securing the network and you've asserted that by doing so at a cheaper cost than the protocol currently supports we'd be delivering more value to the market.
However, if you actually observe where the (pure monetary asset) market has parked its capital, it isn't in cheaply secured blockchains since they've been available for a very long time and have ended up valueless. Rather it's in high energy-budget coins. i.e. coins that have required large amounts of natural energy to produce on a cumulative basis.
In that context, Dash has a great advantage in being able to provide on-chain services in that group. It's the only Proof of Work coin that can (because to do so you need to decouple the service provision aspect of the protocol so it can work independently of the mining process which works in slow blocktime. For that you need masternodes).
Utility coins on the other hand are only concerned with.......utility ! That's all they're there for. They don't need any kind of store of value monetary attributes which is why they use POS and we are now starting to see all kinds of technology-driven specialisation which blows Dash's utility features away.
IMO therefore, Dash has to consolidate its strength which is providing utility in the POW sector where it's competitive. That means:
This sector is also diminishing in terms of players but growing in terms of value so it would be a highly rewarded challenge to be able to stay in the pure POW race IMO.
- selling hashrate for a high price
- giving primary buyers a competitive amount of coin for their money (not 1 in every 2)
- only subsidising the service layer to the extent that it adds value to the coin (but growing it meanwhile)