I assume that 95-99% of this forum would not have heard of bitcoin if the emission would have been infinite from the beginning. satoshis incentive design for bitcoin is from an economics perspective the schumpeterian wet dream for raising awareness for an invention.
For all I know, computer types were first attracted to bitcoin for the pleasure of helping to test a smart solution to an old technical problem. Then libertarians got interested because they saw in bitcoin a way to build an economy independent of government and banks. Then drug users and sellers adopted it as a way to pay for drugs without the DEA knowledge (so they thought). At some point, others noticed the value going up like crazy, and bought into it as a get-filthy-rich-quick scheme.
I suspect that a majority of the people in this forum are from the latter group. The finite supply of bitcoins is important only for that group, because it is part of the argument that "proves" that the price will be astronomical one day. But it is not essential, even to them; that argument would have been only a little less convincing if the supply was programmed to increase 5%/year, forever. So much so, that they are not bothered by the current 5-10% inflation rate.
It seems you were too late for the get-filthy-rich-quick scheme party and are now butthurt, but hey, you can still have an academic interest.