What? Just because Roosevelt et. al. were proponents doesn't make it a good idea. You hypothesis presupposes something about human nature that I think is fundamentally flawed, namely that people will be inclined to evenly disperse the benefits of such a program. Much like communism, or some sort of stateless libertarian utopia(what ever that's even called?) it sounds nice on paper if you squint and hand wave away the way real people actually behave.
"stateless libertarian utopia(what ever that's even called?)"
Anarchism. [1] "Stateless libertarian" is by most useful definitions an oxymoron.
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism - the popular conception of the term and the totality of what is lumped under that term are quite dissimilar. Non-disclaimer, I'm not an anarchist, only a libertarian.
I'm familiar with the word, I didn't use it because I was trying keep the focus on libertarianism which I don't necessarily connect with anarchism. Maybe Propertarian Utopia would have better captured what I was trying to say.
