FWIW, the objective air drop is almost identical to burning except: a) psychological factors (which may go either way, it is not really clear); and b) airdrop to SP-only disadvantages STEEM holders, which on the surface might seem good but remember that it is STEEM holders/traders/speculators who determine the price. One of the problems with the original hyperinflation model was that it advantaged SP holders (who were protected against inflation) over STEEM holders (who were not too much). The result was STEEM being largely rejected by speculators (who didn't and don't want to lock up their coins) and poor price performance in the markets. In general I don't think too much advantage to SP is really good for Steem.
It is also possible to air drop on both STEEM and SP (which IIRC was what Golos did), making the airdrop actually identical to the burn except for psychological factors.
Agreed, an airdrop to liquid as well as SP does make more sense than just SP. (On a related note, I still fully support getting rid of Steem Power, but that's a topic for another day.) That would indeed make it identical to burning. "Psychological factors" play a substantial role in the crypto world, so the option which leads to better PR is the one to go for. I have no idea which one would be better psychologically, but both burns and airdrops do often lead to significant demand for the tokens that execute them.
Wait, I though SP and steem were the same token, aren't they?
Man I still have a lot to learn.
Yes, but SP are a subset of the total STEEM supply.