Your entire "improvement" is based on your assumption of how bitcoin will ideally be utilized in the future. What if it doesn't become a global currency, but instead develops into a competitor to the ACH system or something else? Merchants and charities may be completely irrelevant.
You are confused. My idea is quite general. The person you are motivating to adopt bitcoin could be a bank... The underlying assumptions are that there is a network externality and that merchant adoption is costly. Are you disagreeing with these? What bitcoin develops into is not relevant. It just needs to have network properties and be costly to adopt. These conditions are more or less guaranteed given the nature of the technology.
Sounds like a lot of unnecessary complexity that gains everyone nothing - aside from requiring additional participation from miners who, for the most part it seems, just want to profit.
What miners profit from is determined by the incentive structure. They will always "just want to profit". The currency designers determine the incentive structure. A well-designed incentive structure should allow miners to profit by performing socially useful functions. The current design does little to further this aim.
I want to use an incentive structure that allows miners to profit by pursuing socially beneficial goals that benefit all currency holders. I would like to change the identity of miners so that miners interests will be identical to those of investors in the currency. I would like to change the reward structure so that it is privately profitable for miners to pursue activities that benefit investors. This is extremely similar to how publically-held companies operate. Bitcoin should adopt the same institutions. They have proven to be amazingly successful.
Why not find ways create incentives without drastic changes that would completely alter the functioning of the protocol? I highly doubt the block reward mechanism will ever change.
You could find ways of creating incentives without drastic changes to the protocol. I haven't heard of any promising suggestions. The protocol is so flawed that it will need drastic changes anyway. I don't see any point of proposing band-aids to patch together a crumbling edifice. It would be futile.