As other users have mentioned you cannot implement a system like this without it being a vector for volume attacks on the network. You also should not pursue volume for volume's sake. I have a few ideas but I consider them my billion dollar ideas, anyways the problem is not with technical implementations but the willingness of human beings to do things that would not increase their own existing wealth, which is why we see capital flight from France after their wealth tax and decreased investing in housing in Canada when foreign investment taxes are raised and so on. Basically if you pursue any type of system that automatically negates wealth accumulation you scare wealthy people away, and your chain would suffer because no other chains want to shoot themselves in the foot by being among the first to do so.
Somewhat ironically considering how anti-gov many crypto users are, they cannot see that some of the only big adopters of crypto simply seek to replace the services that already exist in the fiat space and be the ones to profit from scare resource accumulation, money creation, lending practices etc., they aren't actually trying that hard to solve society's problems because that would be less profitable for them. Basically the answers to our problems are all out there already, but why would anyone who is rich in the current systems want to change what's working for them.
Lets assume two things:
That would eliminate the volume attacks on the network, in fact it would speed up the network.
And, if 10-20 STEEM in the future became valuable enough to fight for, in our current state we most likely would crash, but with smart implementation of entanglement we could use the network to the advantage of the total user experience.
Crypto users are starting to rule now, and will rule hardcore in the future. But to comment on your statement, Professional Politics has created too many countries that spend the money of the many on stuff like... finding out how the sex-life of mosquitoes evolve over time with or without cocaine involved... among other stupid things you find in the 500 page long Invoice from the "government" to the "people".
Taxes the current system is an old dinosaur that needs to be replaced with a new system that allow us to DELEGATE our hard earned assets to projects that are not... how do I put it... a scam.
Because people die, and system changes as a new generation innovate, and that is definitive.
Not to get into a tangent but from a technical standpoint Iota doesn't have very strong legs to stand on, the project is likely at a standstill as it wonders how to convince people that the impossible is possible in that the processing and energy requirements of doing the transactions is likely much more than the devices they claim to be aiming for use in, and as things are now they won't be able to handle many transactions at all. Plus their distribution was terrible and it's likely an elaborate pump and dump with tons of buzzwords to distract and attract investors.
That aside, I do look forward to seeing how other dags or types of entanglement networks work out when tested to the limits in real-world cases.
Call it personal preference then that I do not think you should incentivize network activity as you are proposing. Look what happens when you give a refund on transactions, they already do that for, guess what, big stock exchanges. It distorts markets and volume for volume's sake is never a good thing, at least from what I've seen of when it is practiced in the real world. It just puts money in the pockets of those who can produce massive volume at scale, as they pocket the transaction bonus in a way that no normal people with access to normal amounts of computing power could.
Yes, government spends a lot of money wastefully, that is not news. But lots of services are provided in many countries, and so far I don't think anyone would argue that most people in the crypto space are seeking asset protection and return on investment. We are just seeing the new capital of cryptocurrency accumulate mostly in the hands of a new few, but I don't see them jumping at the chance to blow all their money on fixing societal ills so much as try to increase their networth.