Your idea is noble and ideal but it'll take more than one person to do so. I spend time going through steem and observe how certain authors always get big upvotes(keep in mind that big is relative) irrespective of what they post. I observe how their quality have largely remained the same in months but always and I mean always get big upvotes. I compare that to mine that to my content that I try to improve regularly and have to go the long way round to get upvotes. It pains me.
The reward system is inconsistent, it seems to protect the interest of the big fish and ignores the small fish. The only time I ever get big upvotes is when I win contests, else I get my regular tiny votes.
So if a John Doe comes to me and says "Hey man, I love the way you write, I'd pay you $x to write something similar or even better for me. That's a lot better than you get", I'd say that is both flattering and rewarding, and I'd gladly take the job. Would you say it is unfair to me considering I've been creating content for more than two years now?