It depends how you define innovation. The US economy is far healthier than the European due to the fact that US businesses can pick among more options than can their counterparts overseas. It is much easier, for example, to reengineer here than their, where they are beholden to massive labor restrictions. Technology is always an option for us - an option that we will select when it has the best return to the bottom line. Where our existing infrastructure/technology, combined with a global delivery strategy are sufficient to make our companies competitive, we will select other ways to invest the capital that will produce the best rate of return. However, where our total solution is uncompetitive as a result of needed technology improvements, we will invest in technology
Bottom line - American companies are freer to implement the best innovation from among a greater number of choices than the Europeans, who have fewer options.
Now the negative for both economies is that publicly held companies tend to focus on short term returns (in response to investor expectations) more than they should, resulting in many short-sighted decisions.
I worked with a Japanese man in the late '80s who told me about HDTV in Japan. We are just getting up to speed now here. How does that fit your model?