Germany and Brazil are younger, but you can claim their culture and history goes back further. Still, as countries, they are younger.
I'm not sure the fact America doesn't aim for a specific VC is a problem. Poland doesn't either, and it's considered god tier.
If you are suggesting they should be geared toward technology, I say...maybe. America is known for it's technology, but even at its height, we Sputnik was the first manmade satellite, Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space, and America was the first to land on the moon likely only because the USSR wasn't trying. CD's were developed by Dutch and Japanese companies. Watson and Crick "discovered" DNA nearly 100 years after Miescher (who was Swiss).
I also think the influence seen of American culture (from Americans) is more nationalism than actual influence, but it may depend on how you look at what influential culture means in Civ. America hardly has a culture of it's own. Our writers are based in Greek themes using a form (novel) that is best traced back to Spain. Our music is in the tradition of Africa (from Rock to Pop to Metal to Country, most of today's music either developed from Blues), as if some of the most well known bands aren't English and singers Canadian or Australian. Art...well, let's not talk about contemporary art (sorry, throwing paint at canvas isn't art to me).
In terms of Civ, I would claim these things show a weak American culture, as our culture has been influenced by so many others. Of course, talking about a 250 year old country, so any cultural traditions were already in place...
But that is all to say that America probably should not have a strong push toward one type of victory, other than domination. Now, that being said, America's bonuses are a bit...shifty. It's hard to quantify exactly what you get from them.
If you buy few tiles, maybe the cheaper tiles still made a difference. When I play as America, sometimes I settle a little differently because I know I CAN buy that lux tile in the 3rd ring if needed.
Maybe the larger sight made a difference too. Without the +1 sight range, would you have known about that one spot you put your second city, when your settler was done? Maybe, but maybe not.
How did the extra movement of minutemen though rough terrain save hammers, or maybe even let you take a city? Did it make a difference? How about the extra points toward a GA? Did that ever help?
For a country that is fairly obsessive about the biggest buildings and malls, and even the biggest rocking chairs, foot stools, and pizzas (you need not go far in rural America to find towns that have claims to the "biggest [insert thing no one cares about being big]" where I'm from, a nearby town has the "biggest chair"), having bonuses that aren't smack-you-in-the-face obvious is a little funny.
If America were mine to design, I'd probably give a straight up boost to attacking cities with the UA, replace courthouses with town halls that give extra culture and happiness while at war (on a per civ basis), and make the UU like the Musketeer, just more power behind it's attacks. War focused, obvious bonuses.
America is not the land of subtlety, but the bonuses in Civ make it so. That would be my beef with the design. I don't think America is too weak (I'd certainly claim there are much worse civs out there), but needing to go in some other direction with the civ? Nah, it's oriented in the right way, domination focus, but not so much so that it's bad to go another way.
The bonuses are just too amorphous to really show the way of America; bigger is better, Super size me.
Now I miss my big cokes....
