To add in support of what Greg Martin has covered, while it can be seen as losing value relative to the people who are staking for someone who chooses not to stake, the one who is unstaked has the burrowed value of the stakers where there is positive price pressure from the limited supply created by stakers. It's a tradeoff, though less advantageous, but worth mentioning for clarity. As it also helps (in my opinion) to the justification of the Origin address and it's function in maintaining a supply ratio. Although it's not explicitly stated in any documentation AFAIK, I would presume it's the bag holder in ETH to prevent against a 51% attack and necessarily needs a matched bonus amount so that its percentage of supply is not diminished by inflation.
To further add support for what has been said, part of the reason why penalties exist for stakes that are not claimed on time are most likely a mechanism of inflation mitigation. Since claiming a stake is not automatic, there will be different end stake days even for otherwise identical stakes and since coins are not minted until that moment a staker collects their coins, inflation won't hit circulation until that moment in time. So while you can predict the day a bunch of stakes end and when it could be withdrawn to affect market value, there's a 2-week window whereby someone who collects their coin could immediately restake their coins and maintain supply to a certain degree.
As for the OP, if things are confusing and convoluted by design, I'd be very interested to hear what your take is on the central banking system, double accounting, base money vs broad money, capital ratios, and reserve requirements might be; seeing as it's a system allowing banks to create money ex nihilo, with presumably the objective of stimulating the economy but really filling its own pockets in the future, much like what you're describing in a way, isn't it? I just wonder if you also consider that system a scam as well since it disguises the reliance of money having value on that of the government that backs it and otherwise dictates a necessary full faith and credit towards a central governing body and not some material object like gold. If not as selfish a role as you've described what about the potential possibility that the Origin address is just a substitution or replacement for that central bank but without the corrupt motives and actions of political parties leading to spending but rather collects it to maintain the growing value?
