The net result is correct but the analysis fails to be pessimistic enough. China vs west argument aside, The median scientist is worth negative, i.e. their idi

The net result is correct but the analysis fails to be pessimistic enough. China vs west argument aside, The median scientist is worth negative, i.e. their idiocy, incompetence, lack of creativity or inability to hold true to the scientific ethic in the face of advancement politics sets the scientific endeavor backwards. There is a way in which dumping funds into science risks tapping into a super linear negative effect (partially because the aggregate power of idiots in science scales that way and partially because the futility of trying to do good when it doesn't pay off causes good scientists to burn out, flip tables, switch to programming, go into wall street, etc.) that is worth net negative more than "finding geniuses that would have gone undiscovered without the funding", which is what you are hoping for by goosing the science money pool.