I’m constantly baffled how Europeans, who get paid 50-60% as much as Americans, and have almost no innovative companies of their own, think their system is somehow better.
This distrust of government pushed the US toward a generally laissez-faire approach to regulation, while most European countries have gone the opposite direction. The approaches differ in terms of workers rights, labor laws, and taxation. Specifically, as a simple example, in the US, you can fire somebody whenever you want. Generally speaking, taxes are lower, it’s easier to start a company, and the regulatory environment is friendlier to business models driven by venture capital.
I’m arguing that it shouldn’t be a surprise, then, that the US has produced more innovation and economic capital than European countries, partially because the regulatory environment is friendlier and more encouraging of risk.
"I’m arguing that it shouldn’t be a surprise, then, that the US has produced more innovation and economic capital than European countries, partially because the regulatory environment is friendlier and more encouraging of risk."
I tend to agree, but that's not really what's at stake for businesses facing organized labor. After WWII, the (capitalist) USA controlled about half of the world's wealth and was home to a robust labor movement. In many ways the American labor movement between ca. 1850 and 1960 was hugely influential in the Western world, including and especially Western Europe. During that time, American businesses produced an astonishing amount of inventions. For these historical reasons, I think the narrative about America's relationship to organized labor is far more complex than you've asserted, unless we're supposed to pretend that American history only dates back to the Reagan administration.