I want to leave this aside and make one more point. You are thinking of freedom in its purely negative form (i am free from…) but positive freedom (i am free to…) makes no appearance. Why? What if I want to be free to live in a country where no one makes so much more money that it’s difficult to be friends?
Throwing myself into this debate here, but what if I want to be free to live in a country that doesn’t put a limit on the amount of wealth I can generate? Or free to live in a country where people can make as much as they have the initiative to make, and be friends with those who also have that initiative?
Exactly why we need a mechanism to resolve these types of disputes. I suggest that the idea of the public good can go far to mitigate these types of competing claims. Libertarianisms’ focus on individuals is notably silent on these issues.