> In the 19th century, the free market resulted in bootstrapping scores of millions of people up out of poverty into the middle class and beyond. The government was not involved in this.

Did you know that the US railroad system was largely propped up by the US government during the 19th century, thus leading to the greatest exchange of goods and services across the whole of the US?

> Have you ever looked at the number of patents?

Did you even read the article?

Today, U.S. universities license 3,000 patents, 3,200 copyrights and 1,600 other licenses to technology startups and existing companies. Collectively, they spin out over 1,100 science-based startups each year, which lead to countless products and tens of thousands of new jobs. This university/government ecosystem became the blueprint for modern innovation ecosystems for other countries.

> Externalities, such as pollution, are not free market, and are in the purview of government.

You're proving my point yet again. If externalities are regulated ("purview of the government") then the good or service that is provided IS NOT REALLY A FREE MARKET. A truly free market would presume that any externality incurred would cause a subsequent good or service to be created to solve that externality.

You keep providing examples of the free market creating goods and services that are meaningful and beneficial as counter examples as to why they are better than government innovations. Yet, I am saying BOTH ARE IMPORTANT and one cannot unilaterally be true because we have cases on both side. In other words, it's not mutually exclusive, both can be true. Yet you continue to beat this drum that free market solves everything. Odd.