Don't Send U.S. No Stinking Best or Brightest

Researchers say there are three or four true geniuses per million people. That stat applies universally, though some geniuses in poorer countries and those with repressive or corrupt governments may waste a lot of their time in defense or find unsupported health that retards development. The United States can do fine without immigrants; it already has more than 320 million people and the environment suffers with more. The few geniuses that might be lost without immigration to become U.S. citizens could discover the telephone or internet and communicate with people that way.

A better way to advance economics nationally and globally would be to reform the patent legal criterion such that a patent’s exclusivity is limited to three years. After that the inventor-patent owner would get 10% royalties for his or her invention when others produce it.

Without ecospheric economics social sustainability is itself endangered. Present global economic policy is mal-adapted to social sustainability for a number of reasons. Geniuses working to transform global economics into a reformed capitalism with sustainability, liberty and justice for all can do so regardless of citizenship. As President Kennedy said; when the tide comes in, all the ships in the harbor rise

The United States has imported a lot of foreign geniuses, yet if native birthed geniuses were all there was, and they didn’t shift allegiance, except where they would be trimmed by poverty growing up or living as in developing countries where the best chances for expressing genius may be elsewhere than in the native country, the U.S.A. might have fewer geniuses than China or India. It is possible that India’s poverty and China’s political system repress genius somewhat.

The idea about shortening the time for patent exclusivity and just giving royalties to patent holders after three years when anyone with capital could produce the idea is that it would stimulate the economy and get patents to market much faster. Inventors with patents would not be short changed at all. It would for example get generic drugs to the sick at much lower cost quicker, yet still return as much or more than the patenter would have earned by selling the product for-himself. Supply would be greater and demand would be more quickly satisfied.