As an American I'm always confused by this kind of statement. From what I've read of European politics it really doesn't seem that different in the rhetoric, just in how the different parties and individuals refer to themselves. The laws and systems are different, but to me the politicians are roughly the same.
Most European countries -- and most democracies in general, though there are some exceptions -- have, largely due to differences in electoral systems, more real axis of variations among visible electoral parties and farther extremes on the axes that roughly align with those in the US which are represented.
On top of that, the center in the US is pretty far to the right in European terms; the mainstream of the Republican and Democratic parties (in government, if not in the electorate) have been, I think fairly, described as, respectively, right-wing and center-right in European terms.
But I don't necessarily think that's a fair comparison. I look at it in terms of what politicians say they want to do and what they eventually do versus what the people say they want and what they accept. In the long run, the rhetoric from politicians and the effect of the resulting laws on the people seem really similar.
But as someone else pointed out elsewhere on the page, I guess it depends on how you define left and right in terms of politics.
> In the long run, the rhetoric from politicians and the effect of the resulting laws on the people seem really similar.
The space occupied by the rhetoric might be similar, but the distribution within that space is not; more significantly, the substantive policy outcomes are not similar, particularly on economic/labor/welfare issues. (Consider things like government policies on healthcare, paid sick leave, paid family/maternity/paternity leave, etc.)
I agree on the difference in distribution, but not on the desire to have those things. All those items you listed, Americans want them to. The difference is the desire to attempt to do so with little or no government involvement. The reason is because in our own short history that it is quite evident that on a national scale the government attempting to do such things almost always ends in spectacular failure. Of course, it's sold as "almost" working so, of course, more money is required to get it right this time.
In many ways, those items are being addressed on the US state level, as they should. I, for one, have all the things you list available to me. Are some more expensive then they should be? Sure, but most likely if you dig into the truth of the matter it's because of government interference.
In the end, most people want the same things regardless of their government.
