All I can say is that I would never allow myself to live in a country where the plight of the poor and needy are left to the whim of the rich. I also don't share your definition of successful. Of course in the 1900s newly populated and created countries had rapid growth , from zero to something. It in no way allows for the management of a modern economy and can never buffer undesirable unregulated corporatism. Balance is required, the only balance libertarianism allows for is the balance between the wild fluctuations of boom and bust, war and peace etc.
19th century America..great if you were white, wealthy and running a corporation you wanted to grow. Not so hot if you were African, poor or working in factory with miserable conditions. Also not enormously great craic if you were Native American.
It's a rich man's dream. No social responsibility, no guilt, no pesky regulation and hey, we really liked the 19th century, so we're all headed back there. Stick your worker protection where the sun don't shine. In the land of liberty, you will have to pay for everything....if not, start hoping someone will throw you a few dollars to get by.
No thanks.
