I'm a US, spawned from immigrants. I wouldn't trade it away to be born where they come from, but it all comes down to personal preference and identity. Without going too far into the weeds, I'm pro-capitalism but not in the way it's been spiritually gutted and hijacked a la the West. I like capitalism– but I hate materialism. Now that said, going back to discussing between the US model and the Scandi novel, the guy I originally replied to also didn't account for something. The US is big as fuck AND rich as fuck. Per his model, financial incentive is disproportionately high, ergo, all innovation/advancement would come from here since that would be the logical conclusion. However, that isn't the case, especially because financial incentive isn't everything. In the US, a lot of people are pigeonholed into having to do careers they don't care for simply due to financial burden/limitations. On the flipside, witg Scandis, with things like UBI and whatnot, people are freed up to follow where their passions and talents lay. As a result, despite having far less total resources, smaller countries like that manage to go toe-to-toe with the American juggernaut in terms of innovation and advancements. Remember that the US GDP alone is still ~15% higher than all of Europe combined. And yet Scandis, French, and Germans are pushing a lot. The SWISS especially. Oh, and the UK as well. The ceiling is much lower, sure. But for the average person it's better and for the collective, makes them much more globally competitive proportionally.