Dreamer, the trouble with the US system (from a head-up-ass Brit perspective) is that it assumes a level of support that is not always available.
An example from a US colleague (totally FAA licenced, but later approved as a CAP509 instructor by the CAA):
In the US system, you put your deicing gear on if it is snowing because FAR number x subsection y clause z says put the deicing gear on.
In the CAA/JAA system, you put the deic9ing gear on because your Met groundschool includes a lot about causes of, and when you are most likely to encounter, airframe or engine icing.
Between instructing and airline flying, I reckon I have actually used less than half of what I learned in CPL and ATPL groundschool. But some of it has been VERY useful, and occasionally potentially lifesaving. Why do even commuter airlines have to ask so many tech and operating questions at interview? Because under the FAA system, it is impossible to know if the applicant actually KNOWS anything! And when you have multiple system failures over the Alps after the toilet blows up, with more systems going off line as the Blue Goo drips down the avionics bay, it's comforting to know where the relevant boxes are, what's likely to fail next, and what extra landing distance you're going to need without flaps (yeah, the NHP can check the book, but as the autopilot was first to fail, you don't want to waste a lot of time on that).
Yeah, your system works for you, but don't assume it's the best in the world. In Europe, an FAA ticket on its own is worth slightly less than a laundry receipt.