No.
<< This would be a form of dividend paid to the taxpayer based on money they have "invested" in R&D that has eventually been spun off into the private sector, e.g., computer technology. Any idea about how the potential "dividend" could be determined? What gross figures would you use to extrapolate a hypothetical figure? I guess you could argue that jobs are the dividend.>>
Dean Baker at EPI has done some related work for his project on eliminating copyright and patents.
A problem is that if the government didn't subsidize this stuff, at least some of it wouldn't get done.
As far as beneficiaries go, along with jobs are access to the new products and the creation of new investment opportunities. These investments are subject to tax, so there is that form of recoupment by the taxpayer. To be sure, such access and opportunities are not fairly distributed, but that goes to the tax system and the nature of copyrights/patents, not to the subsidy of R&D.
The job flight is a problem, as you note, but this goes to trade policy, not public investment.
<< But with these moving to other countires, that's a joke. Also, how would you compare the money gained from jobs versus profit on these technologies? Any ballpark figures?>
For me a dividend demand is uncomfortably close to tax cuts. If you say the private returns to public subsidies are "my money," somebody is sure to say, and they already have, the taxes are 'my money' to so please give them back.
Better to use the success of these subsidies, from a ROR standpoint, to promote further public investment of all types and open the way for a debate on patents, copyrights, and tax policy.
Cheers,
MBS