Neither of those claims is grounded in evidence or common sense. What is more likely is that a subtle change in protocol imposed by the miners (such as a postponement of the next halving, without changing the 21 M cap) would be rationalized as "harmless" or even "good for bitcoin"; and the "economic majority" would just submit to it. (BIP100 is going that way: it says that the Core devs should "decide" the blocksize issue by handing over the decision to the miners. No wonder that the miners like it...)
if a subtle change is deemed "good for bitcoin" by everyone, then it is implemented and we are all happy things are moving along. price rises.
everyone agreed, what's the problem?
now explain to me why the FED doesn't just print 4 billion dollars a month and use that money to prop up the US stock market?
edit: oh wait ay they are a private centrally controlled entity and CAN do that if they so choose