The rules were made to make flying an elite activity.
The US on the other hand hzve rules that open up flying to the masses - I sm one of them - bought a plane in the US and operste it on the US register as I do not want to go to the time and expense of putting it on the local register.
Indeed the US reg makes it easy to operate.
There are two locally registered airplanes down here which were being switched back to the US register when the A&P IA died in odd circumstances, they went out of local annual and have to be re regustered locally for the switch to occur. A very expensive proposition due to the hangar in which they are located "does not meet standards for work to be carried out to local standards" - so spend a quarter of a million dollars on the hangar (which is a true hangar unlike the one here!) and you can then put the airplanes back to local annual and then switch them to US. Not a realistic proposition for airplanes once on US and in annual have a value at the upper end of a total of $75,000.
To this day over five years since they went out of local annual they sit in the hangar on a nearby island untouched.
That would not be the case had they remained on the US register.
The US has a very safe regulatory regime - the Sala incident would have been less dodgy with an EASA state registered airplane in the same circumstances, after all Wingy type arrangements are legitimate in EASAland (hands up all those who think the pilot of the Sala flight was going to be paying 50% of the cost if the flight!)
Foying US registered airplanes makes flying accessible, it is not a washed up third world convenience to cut corners, as possibly implied by the tennor of the original post. The reason why some locations say based here must be registered here has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with the taxes, levies, duties and annual imposts which can be collected on locally registered airplanes once they have breached the bond status of the airport.