First off, thank you for doing what you're doing as a driver to prevent this kind of crash. You're right, cyclists are blithering idiots about drivers doing this, but it protects them even if they don't understand that.
As a cyclist (about 15,000 total miles, half touring, half commuting split between Boston and Cleveland), my solution to the problem is to not design the infrastructure in ways that sets cyclists up for the crash.
It is absolutely woefully bad design that cycle lanes on the right continue all the way to the intersection. A solution that works for experienced cyclists to to end the bike lane some distance before the intersection. This forces a merge in a zone where there's no risk of a right hook. I float this with the full understanding that it only works for cyclists who are capable of making the merge at around 20mph/30kmph. And/or where the topography is favorable.
No, you don't have to be able to sustain that speed, but being able to do it in short bursts greatly expands your choices when riding in urban traffic.
My experience has been that nobody minds much at that speed, especially if you merge back into the "bike lane" while you're still in the intersection but after you're past the lanes people would be turning right into. Turning traffic has to slow anyway to make the turn, after all.
This is a specific case of a general rule I try to apply when riding: Make people choose to hit you; don't let them do it accidentally.
I would add that this is really only a valid strategy in urban traffic where even the major arterials only flow under 30mph because the density of turns and stop lights prevents higher speeds. Major arteries in the suburbs or around malls are a nightmare for riding because traffic generally flows a lot faster. Some of the most hair-raising riding I've done was near a mall while bike touring. It was basically unavoidable, and also absolutely miserable.