Was Adam Smith right in that all that is required for economic growth is peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable ad?

[Elena]

Adam Smith wrote, "Little else is required to carry a state to the highest degree of affluence from the lowest barbarism but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice; all the rest being brought about by the natural course of things. All governments which thwart the natural course are unnatural, and to support themselves, are obliged to be oppressive and tyrannical." Was Adam Smith right in that all that is required for economic growth is peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice? If Adam Smith is right, why do so few countries follow this easy recipe for economic growth? What have we learned about economic development since Adam Smith wrote this quote in the 1700s? If you had to boil down the causes of growth to 1-5 primary factors, what would they be (if different than Adam Smith's)?

[simplicitus]

1. No. He was just listing the factors that were missing in the U.K. at the time. Like fish with water, he was ignoring those factors which the U.K. already had.

2. One factor he was missing is that most elites and hence most governments do not want to share their power and so do not want the rest of the population to become better off:
http://whynationsfail.com/summary/
http://www.macroresilience.com/2010/12/1...apitalism/

3. Then there is the issue of social capital:
http://www.forbes.com/2006/09/22/trust-e...rford.html
http://moneywatch.bnet.com/economic-news...enemy/690/

4. But Adam Smith aso recognized the importance of infrastructure and education and the responsibility of the government for both; the responsibility of the government to regulate the financial sector; etc.
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/08/the-r...paved.html
http://www.voxeu.org/article/why-do-afri...-so-little