The US perhaps has the best food but it doesn't mean that you can easily find it, and it doesn't mean that you will usually eat it. It means that with the population size and diversity, that if only 3% of restaurants are great, it still represents a great number of places.

In my area, admittedly one of the culinary capitals, many chefs (and even mom/pop places) don't try to be specifically authentic - they work with what can be locally sourced and make dishes based upon that - it may be similar to the "homeland" dish, but it is different. There are also very few national chains. If I locally spend more than $100 in a year on food (including fast food) from anything more than a small local restaurant group, it would be a lot. I realize this is an anomaly for the US.

Now, what someone previously said is quite true. When I was in Spain, just dropping into wherever for a snack, provided usually great and affordable food. Here, it is an overpriced event. It is similar for other cuisines that don't have a lot of local choices.

What the US has that many other places don't is variety. This can make for a perception of "best food" for anyone who spends much time anywhere. Take Argentina, for example. (You could replace this with many other examples). Steaks? Yum. Empanadas? Yum. Pizzas? Yum. Ice Cream? Yum. If you venture too far out of this range, you can find a few good places, but you don't find a plethora of creative cuisines and preparations. If you go for a week, you eat a bunch of good food. By week 2, you just wish more places offered a nice piece of fish, or some nice steamed fresh vegetables next to your meat. Want Mexican food? It is an expensive imported item, and if you want it spicy? Good luck!

There is plenty wrong with the US diet and I'm not going to get into that part of the conversation. I'm just glad I live in an area where I don't have to partake in consuming industrial food on a daily basis.