Jim, your point has been made by several others and is a valid sentiment but possibly not matching the context of DMS in 2019. As I am told the history, DMS was at a point where there simply were not enough members willing to teach classes and the honorarium program was implemented to draw out more teachers. As time went on, the leadership even adjusted the rules so that $100 of General Fund money would be distributed for classes even if there were only 3 attendees. The incentives were successful in drawing teachers to the point that the cash outflow exceeded not only expectations, but also went beyond the point of affordability.
Now your point expresses a sentiment that teaching should be voluntary and without financial recompense of any fashion (presumably beyond class supplies reimbursement) What this wish seems to overlook is what is happening in membership volume growth and member churn.
Look at this chart from @Brandon_Green:
In Y2014, maybe we average about 40-45 new adds/month.The monthly drops rate maybe average about 25. Presuming Adds require some amount of training, teachers are training low 40’s to increase membership by 15-20 folk.
Y2015, the numbers are about the same ratio: Add 40-50, train ~80. Same ratio, but it is twice the number of people to be trained every month.
Y2018, the situation is way worse: Add 40-50, train ~140.
Could it be that you reach a point were both absolute numbers and churn creates such a large training demand for relatively small membership growth that expecting members to volunteer to meet that demand is just simply unrealistic?
Some seem to be convinced that addressing the drop out rate is beyond DMS control. What is happening is a revamped PR effort to attract new members. I will not be surprised if there is not some repeating of history as DMS finds the need once again to have to figure out how to meet the demand for teachers. The inquiry made by this OP and the numerous others starting to show up asking for classes do seem to be suggesting this.