ATOM has a market cap of 2.2 billion and currently has a 10% inflation rate, i.e., a $220m security payment a year and earns presently ~$1m in revenue a year.
Any secondary inflation token would need a value proposition of some kind to be able to support this if unchanged. NTRN and OSMO are both mentioned here, but NTRN already gives 25% of its revenue to the hub (if I recall correctly) and Osmosis’ revenue is around 6.5m a year. Neither of these tokens could compete with the level of emissions ATOM offers sustainably, and a newly created token would face similar issues without a substantial new revenue source.
The payments for security are far too high on the Cosmos Hub, and rather than trying to offload these to an alternative token, the actual amount of inflation should be re-evaluated.
The last time this was discussed was incredibly contentious, with the inflation min being heavily rejected and the inflation max only passing narrowly and being blamed for a drop in ATOM value so I doubt this will ever happen.