Well, the idea is that the economy should be able to self-regulate. People don't want to work in bad conditions and they don't want to support polluting compani

Well, the idea is that the economy should be able to self-regulate. People don't want to work in bad conditions and they don't want to support polluting companies, which makes these companies unable to compete. In this way, laissez-faire economy has morality, because people can directly vote with their wallet and their feet. In order to maximize profits, companies will have to seek the favor of people. Even today, companies compete on being clean and treating their workers well, even further than any regulations would require them. The historical difference is that back then people weren't asking for higher standards, i.e. there was lack of knowledge and lack of alternatives. Also, I don't believe that horrible working conditions have ever been a standard practice, but rather an extreme example of some anomaly that has resulted from coercion or even state regulation of some sort. There would be less price gouging and less monopolies, because these both are caused by lack of competition. There are lots of regulatory moats than decrease competition and increase costs.