As to what you said, the nations you listed are either city-states or very small nations - they aren't really sizable except for Switzerland and Norway. If you'll check, the economic heart of any nation is in its major cities - yes, there is revenue from agriculture, mining, and so forth in rural areas, but this almost never comes close to the revenue generated in urban regions with their factories, mercantile, and finance sectors. For instance, if Kansas goes broke, no big deal...but if NYC goes broke, our economy is suddenly in big trouble.
The much smaller nations and especially the city-states don't have to worry about building and maintaining (at taxpayer expense) infrastructure such as roads, electricity et al, all over vast rural distances, and I believe you'll find that - again, with the exception of Norway and perhaps Switzerland - spend a sizable chunk of their tax revenue on national defense. They are able to use their tax revenue much more effectively to support their urban infrastructure instead. And btw, while Bermuda isn't urban, it is very, very friendly to the rich, and this skews the per capita income just as the oil wealth of OPEC nations does.
In other words, in such a study, city-states and much smaller nations are statistical outliers, just as are the OPEC nations whose vast oil-wealth would also skew such a study. The key, then, would be to compare apples to apples, to compare sizable nations with large rural expanses with other such nations.
My point is, if the hallmark of the success of an economy is the standard of living of its citizens, then we should be looking at what governmental and economic systems work best for nations that are like America: sizable, with significant rural areas, and with significant military power (which knocks Costa Rica out of the study, since they have no taxpayer-supported military). What we find is that the first-world democracies generally have the highest standard of living...and every single one of those first-world democracies have the big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation that conservatives decry.
To the mind of modern conservatives in America, this makes no sense...but one must ask, then, that why it is, of all the nations in the world (save OPEC states, city-states and very, very small nations), ALL the nations with the highest standard of living are first-world socialized democracies, all of whom have the big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation that - according to the conservatives - are a sure-fire path to the economic dustbin of history?