I don't disagree that there is a plethora of examples of blatant greed evident on Steem.  However, what we're discussing is how to fund basic and essential development of the blockchain, and that is likely going to be voted on, with stake weighted votes.  While individuals may prefer to avoid costs they can, there are ways to tap stake that aren't avoidable for folks with Steem.

Donations are voluntary contributions, and I reckon we agree that won't be sufficient to reliably fund development.  Non-voluntary contributions, whether from all rewards, only author rewards, or stake, are a tax, and the only realistic way to tax Steem users is code.

The only way to avoid such a tax is to not hold whatever is being taxed.

There's going to be voluminous debate and resistance no matter what form of tax ultimately is chosen, and for those that desire to remain invested in Steem, tax will be a facet of the token.

I have explained a couple times that taxing rewards decreases incentive to create good content, and we already have problems with content quality.  It will also decrease incentive to join Steem, and remain, and we have a dire problem with retention now.  Author rewards are the most problematic source of funds because creators are already the weakest link in the chain that creates value for Steem.  Taxing author rewards will close the spigot from which the value of Steem originates - content.

Witnesses are in some cases below break even already.  Taxing their rewards will definitely reduce their number, and that reduces the security of the blockchain, a terrible thing we do not want.

Curation is already horrible, since it is largely (at least by those greedy folks we discussed earlier) only being done to gain profits.  It's not really curation at all, but mining Steem, and that's why there even are bidbots.  Decreasing the incentive to seek rent via curation doesn't strike me as a particularly bad thing to do, TBQH.  Even so, basing tax on curation rewards lets folks that don't curate get a free ride.  

Folks that don't earn rewards won't pay tax that is based on rewards.  This is a huge incentive to not create, curate, or witness, and we already know that greedy profiteers will do whatever is most profitable.  That's why if we want to create an incentive by making it possible to avoid the SPS tax, we sure as hell don't want to incentivize them to avoid rewards - since rewards are doled out to encourage the things rewarded.

The only reasonable basis for an SPS tax is stake, and no stakeholder then gets a free ride and can avoid the tax by not doing the good things we want to encourage, the things rewards pay folks to do.  Stake will choose what is funded.  It's fair that stake then funds it.  Stake will benefit from the development effected through capital gains.  Stake should invest in the development equally to it's portion of benefit, and stake tax does that.

Taxing rewards will harm Steem.  Let's not do that.  Let's do what will produce the best result in terms of equity and gains, which is to fairly apportion the SPS funding to the stake that will benefit from it.  Some folks will squirm, and some might even leave.  Folks that leave because they don't want to fund development that will benefit them proportional to their contribution aren't folks we really want to do business with anyway.  They are only willing to be here if we pay the bills while they reap the profits.

We need development if we want our investments in Steem to produce gains, and not dwindle as the blockchain becomes irrelevant.  Reasonable investors and redfish alike will be willing to contribute their fair share to grow their stakes.  

Thanks!