How did the US go from colony to technological and economic leader in less than 200 years

[Denkt]

USA is significantly more productive than EU as a whole
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD?locations=US-EU

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.KD?locations=US-EU

US also more or less seems to dwarf every other country in the World in terms and technology and science output, maybe with the exception of China.

 

[Kovax]

Another factor was the establishment of the Federal Reserve system, which after seeing how European states were periodically forced to beg for loans and other monetary favors, made the US practically independent from private bankers.

It certainly helps to have huge quantities of valuable raw materials practically at your fingertips, and a couple of extensive river networks to move those resources to the coasts. The government used a lot of the tax and tariff revenues from the South to invest and encourage private investment in infrastructure (initially canals) between the coal mines and iron mines in the North, leading to a rapidly expanding industrial base which practically caught up with Europe over the course of the 19th Century. By the early 20th Century, it was ahead in a lot of ways.

 

[bz249]

Oh there was WW1... which transformed the UK and France from a lender to a borrower nation and in the meantime the financial center moved from London to New York.

 

[Gordy]

Never bombed in either world war (apart from some very minor if nasty incidents involving Japanese ballon bombs). Never invaded (aside from 1812). Only the one civil war disturbs a fairly peaceful history (on home soil anyway).

Benefitted from German intellectuals such as Einstein being forced out of German academia and turning up in the USA. Also benefitted from Nazi scientists.

 

[Dinglehoff]

The interwar and post-war period is already after the United States' ascension as a great power.

 

[henzington]

Lending to Entente also greatly enriched the USA and especially at the expense of Europe and Germany specifically

 

[Dinglehoff]

The US already had huge population, resources, and manufacturing strength. It was also flexing hard in this hemisphere and overseas for years.

 

[Had a dad]

A lot of ground, a lot of resources, good climate, a big influx of people that want to work hard and no big scary countries nearby.

pretty much this.

 

[Gordy]

The interwar and post-war period is already after the United States' ascension as a great power.

Yes but they still had some way to go before becoming a super power.

 

[pithorr]

Yes but they still had some way to go before becoming a super power.

During the WW2 they already were the superpower. Their contribution on all theatres was crucial and... they used NUKES!

 

[Gordy]

During the WW2 they already were the superpower. Their contribution on all theatres was crucial and... they used NUKES!

Technological and economic leader is probably pushing things though. They were certainly a very powerful nation but they could hardly just brush aside either the Japanese or the Germans.

After WW2, it was clear that other great powers such Japan, France, Germany and the UK were finished as global hegemons and there were now only two super powers the USA and the USSR (China sort of gets added in later but they were never quite on this level).

It really wasn't clear throughout the cold war that the USA and allies would have won if this cold war had become WW3. The USSR had a massive advantage in terms of the sheer numbers of tanks, missiles etc. Nobody really knew whether the presumed technological advantage of the USA would count for much or how the Soviet "empire" would hold together during any war.

For the USA to be the sole super power, you are really looking to the fall of the Soviet Union onwards.

 

[bz249]

Technological and economic leader is probably pushing things though. They were certainly a very powerful nation but they could hardly just brush aside either the Japanese or the Germans.

After WW2, it was clear that other great powers such Japan, France, Germany and the UK were finished as global hegemons and there were now only two super powers the USA and the USSR (China sort of gets added in later but they were never quite on this level).

It really wasn't clear throughout the cold war that the USA and allies would have won if this cold war had become WW3. The USSR had a massive advantage in terms of the sheer numbers of tanks, missiles etc. Nobody really knew whether the presumed technological advantage of the USA would count for much or how the Soviet "empire" would hold together during any war.

For the USA to be the sole super power, you are really looking to the fall of the Soviet Union onwards.

Well the UK made a run for being the third superpower, but no later then the Suez Crisis it was evident that they were not.

 

[Gordy]

Well the UK made a run for being the third superpower, but no later then the Suez Crisis it was evident that they were not.

I'm not sure this misunderstanding of Britain's status was ever shared by the rest of the world and I think you are exaggerating it.

Part of the Suez miscalculation was not so much that "We are British, we can afford to ignore world opinion" but "The Americans will support us, they are our allies". There was already an implicit understanding that we are no longer quite at the same level as the USA.

 

[Director]

Here's five:

1) The US was able to expand into a continental-sized area whose mineral resources had never been tapped; the California gold rush and the Minnesota iron mines are just two examples. The 'breaking of the sod' in the Midwest opened an area to settlement as large as Europe
2) The US became extremely large: the Confederacy during the Civil War was the size of Europe and the rest of the US was larger (in area)
3) Transportation: from 1798 to 1898 the US grew into a great power in population, took over the world lead in industry and had more railroad lines than the rest of the world combined. The Transcontinental Railroad was an amazing feat that kept the country united: travel to California went from $1000+ and six months' time to $100+ and ten days' time. Efficient transportation created a huge, unified, customs-free market - the largest in the world - and permitted the vast interior lands to be handed out to settlers. Immigration exploded, and many of the immigrants were intelligent, hard-working people fleeing political or economic repression
4) A culture that was, by standards of the day, stable, low-taxing, business-friendly and non-corrupt; that attracted immense investment from Europe
5) A world war in which Britain and France cashed in their holdings and borrowed heavily while suffering massive casualties. Post-war the global financial capital moved from London to New York and the US became a lending power

 

[bz249]

I'm not sure this misunderstanding of Britain's status was ever shared by the rest of the world and I think you are exaggerating it.

Part of the Suez miscalculation was not so much that "We are British, we can afford to ignore world opinion" but "The Americans will support us, they are our allies". There was already an implicit understanding that we are no longer quite at the same level as the USA.

Ok, I am not an expert of that particular era, however didn't the British tried to built a competitive nucleat deterrence in the early fifties...with all those V-bombers and other stuff, ultimately it failed and they cannot sustain their effort in the missile age. But at least looked like they are trying it for real.

 

[Gordy]

Ok, I am not an expert of that particular era, however didn't the British tried to built a competitive nucleat deterrence in the early fifties...with all those V-bombers and other stuff, ultimately it failed and they cannot sustain their effort in the missile age. But at least looked like they are trying it for real.

We developed our own nukes as did the French. We could build our own today, we have the technology, but it's just a question of money, they are cheaper to buy in. But nukes aren't a marker of super power status any more Israel probably has nukes, India has nukes, Pakistan has nukes etc.

 

[Kazanov]

I'm not sure this misunderstanding of Britain's status was ever shared by the rest of the world and I think you are exaggerating it.

Part of the Suez miscalculation was not so much that "We are British, we can afford to ignore world opinion" but "The Americans will support us, they are our allies". There was already an implicit understanding that we are no longer quite at the same level as the USA.

It was so sad, the UK lost all its power in that very moment yet the UK continues to support the US to this day. It was like the UK-Portugal alliance but the UK is the new Portugal in their relationships with the US.

 

[Abdul Goatherd]

The US seems to be somewhat unusual for a former colony since it just like 100-150 years after its independence had surpassed pretty much all European great Powers in economic and technological development. It is not clear to me how US managed to do such enormous growth so quickly, did it simply get alot of things right from the start that others did not?

200 or even 100-150 years is a very long time. Given that time frame, I wouldn't be surprised by any country.

No, it was more like 50 years or less. And not particularly unique. Other countries have achieved as great or greater gains in shorter periods (e.g. France, Germany, Japan, Russia, etc.) It really only takes 10-20 years or so to industrialize. But it has to be focused.

The short-answer for US: protectionist tariffs and underpopulation and luck. Other countries haven't had it that easy (Japan was not allowed tariffs, Russia had massive rural overpopulation).

That said, US was not that far behind to begin with.

Only two countries in history have traversed the fabulous 20-to-80 ground -- that is have their GDP per capita leap from less than 20% of the global leader to over 80% of the global leader. One is Japan, the other is Korea. And it didn't take that long for them to accomplish that either. But no other countries have ever accomplished that feat.

Confucian ethic beats Protestant ethic any day of the week.

 

[Hibernian]

The short-answer for US: protectionist tariffs and underpopulation and luck. Other countries haven't had it that easy (Japan was not allowed tariffs, Russia had massive rural overpopulation).

Russia had overpopulation?

Russia's rural areas were poverty-stricken, illiterate and undeveloped, but I wouldn't call the vastness of that land interspersed with the odd village "overpopulated".


And indeed "Protestant work ethic" is utter tosh.

 

[Dinglehoff]

Yes but they still had some way to go before becoming a super power.

I'd say the US was an economic and technological leader before becoming a super power.

I'm not sure this misunderstanding of Britain's status was ever shared by the rest of the world and I think you are exaggerating it.

Part of the Suez miscalculation was not so much that "We are British, we can afford to ignore world opinion" but "The Americans will support us, they are our allies". There was already an implicit understanding that we are no longer quite at the same level as the USA.

The misunderstanding was UK and France thinking they can intervene without our permission; which would have been a perfectly reasonable expectation for them as world powers and WWII winners.