You ask me what patent create what monopolies, the verdict is a clear example of how Apple has a monopoly on creating devices that even remotely resemble an iPhone.
And your last remark is a clear example of how inventors and investors are protected at the expense of the consumer.
It's not governments job to reduce the risks of investors. If he thinks he can make money with the idea, he will still invest, it's for him to decide. All you are doing with patents is reduce risk and increase ROI at the expense of the consumer.
It's also not governments job to protect the income of an inventor. If the market values his ideas at nothing, they are worth nothing. Creating a deed of ownership to a concept is just ridiculous. The value of the inventor is inventing solutions, if the market values that skill they will price it accordingly. It's not governments job to protect his income at the expense of the consumer.
What governments job is, is protecting Apple's products. So products that do not originate from Apple that bare the Apple logo, are not allowed to be sold. This way government is protecting the consumer, the employees and the investors at the same time.
No amount of reform of current patent law is going to change these facts.
Btw, property rights are something entirely different than intellectual rights.