Indeed. If only the people decide, who holds bitcoin, why wouldn't they abolish the coinbase tx completly, I mean now.
Well,Haha nice usage of a rhetorical question as a springboard!
Presumably anyone borrowing bitcoins would require a clause in the loan agreement that if the subsidy were to be reduced (change in the money supply were to occur) that their principal and/or interest would be adjusted appropriately. If the subsidy is discontinued there would be little gain for those who have lent out their coins. And who lends bitcoins? The economic majority, that's who. So it is not in the best interest of any of the economic majority to change the rules as far as the rate of Bitcoin issuance -- in either direct direction.
Maybe a legal definition of bitcoin would be useful afterall then, so that reduction of originally specified subsidy is off the table, saving gosh knows how many paragraphs on each and every loan contract throughout the next 136 or 140 or whatever it is years?
(I doubt a scheduled per original schedule reduction would grant a debtor relief, would it?)
-MarkM-