I agree that the US offers a whole lot that other countries do not. I would disagree that the US government offers anything other governments do not.

Of course, the US government has a role in the other attractive attributes the US has, but I personally think that role is exaggerated. I think the US would still be an economically dominant world power if it had the government of, say, Germany.

>> I would disagree that the US government offers anything other governments do not.

You are very first-world centric, then. While I am no interventionist, you are discounting the role the US Military has worldwide on trade, peacekeeping, and other vital roles it actually does a good job at when it's not fucking things up (which is often).

>> I think the US would still be an economically dominant world power if it had the government of, say, Germany.

Including the racial makeup of Germany and the immigration policies?

Are you trying to suggest that the racial makeup of Germany is inferior to America? I'd say population size, geographic properties (location, climate, resources, etc) and economic history count for much more than any racial inferiority.

Germany has a population 25% as large as America, and a GDP 18% of America's. So maybe if you ignored history, geography, a potential nonlinear relationship between population and economic domination¹ you could claim this discrepancy is solely due to racial differences between the populations of America and Germany. But I'm pretty damn skeptical of that.

1: for instance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winner-take-all_market

>> inferior

Uh, no. Just that it is vastly different and that it is a relevant data point.

Different in a way that's relevant when it comes to explaining discrepancies in economic output?