I don't think you know what you're talking about. The concentration of capital in Blurt is reversible because there's no factor that would dramatically tip the rewards scales in favor of one group. this is just a matter of new investors. This is simply because so few people have invested in this blockchain so far, and co-funders are still holding the initial stake. As soon as new capital arrives, I guarantee a very large portion will dissipate.
On hive contrary: You yourself wrote that DV is the reason most tokens go to whales. So whether you use your head or a jackhammer, this concrete has the ability to regenerate and grow faster than you can ever pound it.
You've picked on HBD, but HBD isn't a good product at all. It's hopeless and unattractive to investors. Why? Because even 15% yields a low rate of return after subtracting dollar inflation. BTC yields better returns, and holding HBD doesn't give you the ability to decide how rewards are distributed. In the case of increases in the Hive token, those who invested in HBD lose out compared to those who invested in Hive.
Secondly, your solution of removing the curation reward is simply stupid and removes many functionalities of the blockchain itself that can be used to create and fund various good applications, while solving nothing. Investors will simply start creating post farms much more frequently than before to continue reaping 100%.
Besides, hardly anyone votes for the reward on Blurt, and it shows. The problem with the curation reward on Hive stems again from the DV: people who care about the curation reward are afraid to vote for content that isn't a "sure thing," meaning content that has a 99% chance of not being downvoted, and that's why you see artificiality in the voting. This artificiality is minimized if the DV disappears. Second problem with it is a Reward curve. On blurt they planning to remove it.
But okay, if you want to bang your head against a self-healing wall, then go ahead. Remember, however, that you won't achieve anything here, because every step forward you take is two steps of concrete.
There are other reasons for artificially increasing engagement, and Blurt! principals seemingly have acted for those reasons. Also, it's not the main problem with curation rewards, as @holozor recently proved to me here.