Fully effective allocating of resources, where "effective" means optimal from the market's point of view, will definitely not benefit society. Quality of life is itself a market inefficiency.

What's the "market's point of view" and how do you determine it?

You simulate a libertarian utopia and watch how it evolves ;).

Out of interest, has anyone actually tried to do that? (the simulation that is).

Then politicians should encourage it. The entire reason to have government is to improve society at some cost to individuals.

There are many valid reasons to have a government - not least of which is protecting individuals from society.

I think the problem is that "some cost" and "individuals" pretty much means means batter the poor desperate people.

Hello there Stalin!

Jokes aside, we should throw away the fundemental luxeries of western civilization for the future. We can compromise on them but not to the degree of going back a century or two.

Should not* throw away

in the long run and on average, benefiting society will benefit individuals.

- In the long run we're all dead

- If people die of hunger or sickness in the short term there will be no long run

Also: Just-world fallacy.