Did you watch beyond the first 10 minutes?

At what point do the things you mentioned move from the little effort category?

Reference?

There are currently 133 licensed medical schools in the US:

http://services.aamc.org/memberlistings/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.search&search_type=MS&wildcard_criteria=&state_criteria=CNT%3AUSA&image=Search

That doesn't change your primary point about a limited supply of doctors producing a higher cost though, but I thought you might want updated numbers.

Why is it one of the worst ideas since FairTax?

They didn't need to as significant portions of the preliminary research, development and training of future employees was done on the basis of federally funded research grants.

I wonder how true this is from a global perspective. Do the chair's of academic departments tend to have fewer or forgo children?

Is that what Nobel intended? Do you have a quote to that effect from his will? As far as interpreting the "in the preceding year" in the context of science, often the award is given for discoveries that have yielded results that might not have been envisioned when the discoveries were made. The siRNA related award a few years ago had really only come into it's own after several years of development, perhaps qualifying it for "conferring the greatest benefit on mankind" (in medicine at least) only several years after the initial discovery.

Also, as I understand it, early awards were given to findings that proved dubious at best (cancer caused by worms? OH YEAH). Thus, the switch to see which findings age gracefully.

I've never heard of a university sending money back to NIH/NSF/other funding agency. Was this a typo or do you have experience somewhere that does this?