Personally I, and many others including in the FAA, think that Part 107 should apply to all sUAS operations - would that consistency make you happier?
In Canada we originally had the equivalent regulation as was originally in the USA. "Model Aircraft" must be flown in a manner that is not reckless or negligent, and must not endanger manned aircraft or persons or property on the ground. The "Don't be Stupid" rule made perfect sense.
When the FAA first introduced a 250gram threshold for registration of UAS, Canada followed suit. The FAA insisted on applying to UAS the same existing distinction then in effect for manned aircraft between Private (Recreational) versus Commercial, i.e. it's no longer a "Model Aircraft" if it's not being used for recreational purposes alone. As per the Pinker case, if you are paid for your flying then it's commercial and a whole different set of rules apply.
Whether it's Congress or the FAA or whoever, that distinction remains. A more lenient set of rules applies if it's for Recreational operations, and a more comprehensive restrictive set of rules applies for Commercial operations. It has
nothing to do with safety. The distinction is determined solely by the
intent of the flight.
Would it make
me happier if one set of rules applied consistently to all Americans? I'm Canadian, eh. I'm sorry if you think I'm being obtuse and inappropriate. I'm just astounded that you Americans seem satisfied with your rules the way they are. You are entitled to the exemptions for recreational flights if you only fly for fun, but certainly not if anyone receives any benefit from those flights. It makes no sense.
In Canada we've gone through several iterations of knee-jerk regulations, most of the time mirroring what was being done in the USA. At first "Model Aircraft" merely had to continue to follow the Don't Be Stupid rule, whereas anyone wishing to do any sort of Commercial operations was forced to apply for a Special Flight Operations Certificate. That was a cumbersome process, requiring submitting paperwork months in advance of any planned commercial flight. If you could successfully demonstrate your worthiness of such a blessing, in a few cases Transport Canada might even grant a blanket SFOC for longer extended periods.
The SFOC application process was cumbersome, and the approval process was an unmanageable burden on Transport Canada. Commercial operators complained, legitimately upset about being forced to wait for approvals when it's not the commercial operators creating the problems in the first place. There are far greater numbers of recreational flyers than commercial operators. For the most part, business operators have a greater liability at stake in operating their business responsibly and according to whatever regulations apply. It is the amateur recreational flyer, many of whom are completely ignorant of any rules, that are of greater safety concern.
Years later we've finally arrived at a set of regulations in Canada that, mostly, make sense. Anything weighing more than 250grams needs to be registered and requires at least a Basic certificate to operate. The Basic restrictions are roughly similar to what is required under your Recreational exemptions to Part 107. For example, Basic operations require you to pass an exam (renewed every two years) with flights only permitted below 400', always within Line-of-Sight, not within any control zone, not within certain perimeters of any aerodrome, or heliports, etc. etc.
If you have a valid need to fly
within a control zone, then you must demonstrate a higher level of proficiency via the Advanced exam and you must then operate under the more extensive Advanced Operations regulations (similar to your full Part 107). You need to coordinate your activities with the authorities governing those control zones, i.e. ATC, etc.
Our current regulations for Remotely Piloted Aircraft no longer contain any distinction between recreational versus commercial operations, as those are deemed meaningless and useless criteria for applying varying levels of SAFETY regulations. The
same consistent set of regulations now apply regardless of the INTENT of your flight. The easier to obtain Basic certification is actually
more restrictive as you are entirely banned from flying within control zones, etc. The more difficult to obtain Advanced certification provides you more freedoms, but you have to work much harder to prove your worthiness of that status.
You can do either/or/both recreational or commercial flights with a Basic certificate same as with an Advanced certificate. The only difference between the two levels of certification is
where they allow you to fly. It has nothing to do with whether you're flying for fun, or as a favour to a friend, or actually being to paid to fly for business purposes.
How and where you fly is far more important than
why you fly.
Anything under 250grams is currently exempt from registration or licensing requirements. The only rule that currently still applies is the same old "Don't be Stupid" rule. I can fly my unregistered Mavic Mini for recreational purposes, or I can fly my Mavic Mini for taking and selling Real Estate photos, or for searching for lost canoes as a volunteer or even as a paid professional. There is no difference whasoever based on
intent, only Don't be Stupid.
. 
