After WWII the US took the lead as the as protector of the free world because of world state in 1945. This lead position made sense becuase the US government was in tack and its production facilities were humming along unlike most of Western Europe. As a result, NATO came into existance with US and Great Britain taking the lead. The communists push for expension and the lack of military power and to a degree a lack trust in the recently defeated axis powers (Germany, Japan, Italy) required the US to take the lead roll as free world protector.(posted 7197 days ago)This leading country (hegemon) provides protection for free countries allowing those countries to spend more of their GDP on other priorities such as social programs. The US gets to protect the world how they see fit so that countries continue to participate in free market theory which benefits the US. The US benefits by having cheap imports mostly raw materials low skill products (oil, textiles, plastic toys) while selling higher valued goods to other countries (cars, computers, software, military weapons).
This all made sense until the fall of communision. Now those that were protected (France, Germany, Italy, Japan) don't feel threatened enough to pay the price for protection (free market costs and political support). So now come the anwers to all the questions...
1)The US is the most productive country in the world by far. This productivy is the result of a domestic free market economy where jobs are not guaranteed. Higher productivity allows for higher standard of livings and its not even close when compared to Europe.... http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/archive/index.php/t-2617.html But this productivity and higher standard of living comes at a cost of less time off and less vacation time.
2) The US can stop spending on the military to pay for underfunded pensions or social programs but France and most EU states can't stop spending on social programs. This is becuase the people expect these social benefits and would vote out such politicians or would start a revolution. The pension plans are greatly underfunded in most European state and its just a house of cards that will collapse over the next 5-10 years.... Various papers support that without major changes in benefits and/or shift into a more domestic free market system most EU countries will not be able to support itself effectively becoming (bankrupt). This only makes sense folks - as the saying goes there is no such thing as a free lunch. http://www.globalaging.org/pension/world/athornforeurope.htm http://www.christiansciencemonitor.com/2003/0729/p01s04-woeu.html
3) Medical cost are high in the US but medical care in the best in the world. Our life expectance is not a reflection of the quality of medical care but a reflection of our free society and quality of life. The US eats too much good tasting foods (because the US has the cash to do so), does not get enough exercise because US jobs are less labor intensive (tech jobs) and entertainment has become more sedimentary (computer games and big screens)and since it does cost to see a doctore many don't go as often as they should. All US citizens can obtain health coverage but all don't have health insurance nor is either required. This is something the US must work out. As other social medical programs show if the US goes to a social medical program the quantity of medical care will increase but the quality will decrease.
4) Making unrelated comparisions... Some comparisions just don't show the underlying facts. Countries with small populations with one social majority or one rich in resources is not a fair comparision to a large multi racial industrialised country such as the US. Taking Sweden, United Arab Emirates, or Switzerland and comparing it to the United states in like taking one state like Florida, Texas or Nevada and compariing its economy, medical care, and state tax structure to the United States as a whole.
Hope this helps put this subject into some perspective...