No, that's ridiculously skewed. They're nowhere near comparable. Back home exists a network of widescale nepotism as pretty much the fallback. Although university spots, frats, and company jobs can be secured through nepotism, it isn't so pervasive that the greater public is barred from access, not so much that you don't continually see rags to riches stories fueled by pure ambition and skill, not so much that isn't positively offset by the amount of quotas, and competitive high-stakes merits one has to their name in relation to X applicant.
An American corporation has three sets of employees or combinations thereof:
1) Those through contacts; nepotism, who you know, referrals, etc.
2) Those through merit and skill.
3)Those through fulfilling quotas for government moolah
And the lowend fillers, who even they are in competition with one another.
I can tell you're still a student who has yet to experience the harsh realities of the job market today. Why don't you go read the sobering statistics concerning large underemployment rates of college graduates, or the increasing worthlessness of a degree today without the appropriate connections and networking. Where do you think the saying "it's not what you know, it's who you know" came from? You think Somalis made that up?

Are there people who are so talented and exceptional that they will break through the barriers and employers will take note? Of course, but that is just as likely as back home as well. No one is going to pass up the 1 in 100,000 genius who can bring in millions in profits to employ their clansmen's illiterate son. That's universal. The reality is, most people, from all backgrounds, are generally mediocre and this is where connections and your family/college network trumps everything. No one goes to Harvard business school because of some secret business knowledge that isn't taught anywhere, rather they go to penetrate the dominant and insular networks that largely fraternize and hire from that inner circle.