More importantly, traffic fines and things of this nature are, in effect, a tax on undesirable behavior (dangerous driving). Simple supply-side economics. It is the same argument that says taxing income less will be an incentive for people to spend more money (and therefore employ more people). On the other hand, with driving tickets, we are trying to do the opposite; provide a disincentive to drive dangerously. Therefore, we the fine needs to be a proper disincentive for them to not drive dangerously. In other words, the taxes, to be most effective, should be based on percentage of income, not a flat rate for everybody.

traffic fines aren’t a “punishment” for say, they’re a tax on bad driving. It doesn’t matter if the person is making more money because they work harder or that the fact that they are speeding has nothing to do with their income. In the same way, how hard you work for your income, and what your job is are inconsequential when we ask for tax cuts, because we want wealthy people to spend their money and stimulate the economy, instead of having it taxed and wasted by the government. That’s called economics.

Concerning taking pride in the profession – yes of course we do. But talk about it? I studied economics, but I guess my friends would be as much interested in hearing me talk about the problems I solved in my job than I would in hearing them talk about their jobs (lawyers, biologists, etc). This would be of course completely different in a meeting of economists, but I would consider this as a professional exchange of information, not just a casual theme to talk about while having some beers in a bar.

Personal effort: yes, to make career you must show personal effort and interest in Europe too, besides some level of intriguing and a good portion of luck as elsewhere in the world. Anyhow I start seeing that the social pressure to advance must be much lower in Europe. If a person wants to make career, assume responsibility an advance on any hierarchical ladder, he is free to do so, he will be most welcome. In fact, these persons will be glad about anyone who chooses not to, finally this represents less potential competition.
Does not choosing the “career option” lead to a personal mediocre potential on the long term? Almost surely, but it also leads to a higher potential in the development of yourself, of your own happiness and personality. Perhaps the question should be: Who do you want to be – a successful professional with high responsibilities or a happy person? Before you say it, yes, I believe that a successful combination of both can be possible, but also very rare.
The effects of this behaviour on any economy? Who moves an economy? Of course the outstanding, high performing individuals who take risks and responsibility are the obvious visual exponent of any company or economy. But who gets the job really done? In my opinion the people working from 8 to 5, no matter their profession, they do their duty, earn their paychecks, fulfil their function in an economy or company and when the job is done they go home with their families without further thinking about their job. Geniuses and outstanding persons are great, but what finally matters is the average worker and employee. Any chain is just as strong as it´s weakest section.

Somehow in Europe (public health care, cheap education and state pensions for retired must help, but are surely not the only reason) it is more acceptable to just settle down, to work below your potential, to find a compromise or balance or however you like to define it between personal and professional live. This is a pure personal choice, personally I am happier reading a book, watching a movie or taking care of the garden than working 12 hours a day in the office to build up a career. If necessary I will work 12 hours, even on weekends, but for me this is the exception, not the rule. My personal professional potential? I still keep reading about economics and in a couple of years I know I will have to take any courses to refresh all I learned on college, or better to say, to update my knowledge, and I will do it since I know that I have to do this if I want to keep my job on the long term. But really, I don´t define myself for having studied economics or the function I have at the company I work at. I really separate sharply between job and private time. And finally, we should be conscious about one fact: If I don´t do it, another one will.
Some years ago I simply decided against career, responsibility and the economic rewards they inevitably bring with them. I took this decision consciously and freely, I just decided that I could not be the person I want to be and have a career, so I made my decisions – and don´t regret it. I make enough money to live comfortably, I am in a situation I can increase my savings on a monthly basis and can afford to spend my vacations travelling around the world. Should I sacrifice this life for a life of career with all it implies? As heretic as it may sound to you – I won´t. My job is for me a way to reach my objectives, not the objective itself.

May I propose the theory that Europeans value more the person than the function the person has in society?

You wrote: “That’s why giving “poor” people money to live on is hard for us to swallow. “Poor” should be a temporary state, (and it usually is, we have a very upwardly-mobile society) that one can get out of if they try hard enough.” I think we both agree this is the ideal situation.
Unfortunately, poverty has many more reasons and is not necessarily a temporary state (at least in Europe), some that even could prevent effectively to come to money, education for example. Chronical sickness. Also structural problems any economy has.
But my point is another. As an economically thinking person, I ask what is cheaper – giving money to the poor to prevent criminality and the breeding of more poor (in Europe we have a pretty example of how poverty generates more poverty due to lack of education) or spending it on preventing and/or punishing the nasty consequences of poverty – criminality, vandalism and so on? I think this question should be answered, no matter which attitude or political conviction you have towards the problem and if you like the idea or not.

And to your comfort: I read many times in this blog comments complaining about the influence of European ideas in the US – in Europe specially unions and the left parties complain loud about the Americanization of society, even of education since the introduction of BA and MA degrees, while the conservatives are neither happy about it. Who knows, perhaps in a few centuries both continents / societies meet somewhere in the middle.