You might care to specify what exactly your argument is then, as I'd formed a similar conclusion.
The Jungle led to an era of reform over nearly a century in which laissez faire and caveat emptor were displaced, largely to positive results, by appropriate regulation.
That regulatory turn had been opposed, increasingly dismantled since the Reagan administration, and in the past month and some has been outright dynamited. The consequences are beginning to show.
If that is your argument, it would benefit by more precise communication.
OK. If I'm not making an argument then we both agree that my argument is not that because things were really bad in 1905 we shouldn't complain that after many decades of progress.
No that is not my argument really.