Innovation, wealth and economic independence.

Today I was reading Graham's idea about Inequality and Risk, and I couldn't avoid asking myself this question all the time... are startups as necessary in the EU economy as in US?

The logic answer is yes, because startups facilitate a competitive market and create dynamism in the economy, avoiding blue chip companies' complacency.

But is this really linked with the amount of innovation in a country?

I understand that a startup is the easiest and cheapest way to innovation in a country.
It is easy, get a group of new graduates, they don't expect a huge salary and have anything to lose, so ask them to take the risk of applying the new findings and theories learned in their studies into the "real world" and wait till some of these groups discover how to best market them.
Voila!, now we have a new company threaten the stablished power, a bunch of millioner nerds and a better off community thanks to the leap in technology which will make our life longer or more pleasant or both.
This is great, but is it really the only way to innovate?

Aren't the universities itself without startups involved the ones which should nurture the society with innovation?

Isn't rewarding enough for a scientist to discover something completely new and revolutionary, the desire of knowledge?

Are all the novel prices focused in maximising profits or in solving misteries?

Are the people who say "I want to be rich" really meaning it? Or do the really care about having enough money in order to not to have to worry about it?

Can a country that realies in its scientist community compete angainst another driven by selfish and ambitious wall street sharks?

Who's been more important in human history Einstein or Onassis, Stephen Hawkins or Bill Gates?

Is this society really $$ driven? Why?