Well no,
The less-fettered economy of the US recovered far faster than either the UK or Europe and 2008 is a distant memory there.
If it had recovered properly you wouldn't have seen the rise of support for radical change and the election of Trump. If it's a distant memory it's because it was in the interests of the rich to make it so, so they could keep making money. Here's a much longer (though still brief) analysis with more detail:
The economy crashed in 2008 because of a housing/mortgage market in the US that was allowed to effectively self regulate since the 90s. This allowed lending to boom which gave the temporary illusion of growth but also created a huge unsustainable bubble. It wasnt just the out of control lending on mortgages. It was also the levels of interdependence the globally situated banks had on each other which meant that when the tide went out it turned out all had been swimming naked. The bankers had a strong incentive to create this bubble because the larger it grew the higher the profits and the higher the individual bonuses.
When everything crashed it turned out that even countries who hadn't participated in the housing bubble were affected because their banks own lending had left everyone exposed. So countries had to borrow billions and billions to bail out the banks because, even though the banks had caused the problem, not to do so would have crashed the economy completely. Privatise the profits, socialise the costs.
When it was suggested there should be some future limits on banks (including on bankers bonuses) or rules to restrain them going forward this was severely resisted by those same banks. Also some of the individuals involved in this were part of an international cabal of paedophiles who were trading insider information with government ministers. When wealth reaches a certain point it actively degrades the advantages capitalism has over other systems.
Some economies recovered faster than others. The US recovered faster at the expense of a complete stagnation of post WW2 improvements in living standards of young people (literally everything stopped improving and started going backwards after 2008. There are stats for this). In the UK the new conservative government proposed we pay back the money spent on bailing out the banks with Austerity. Services were cut, benefits were cut, spending on programmes for young people were cut and we are still feeling the effects.pf that today. Latency.
In the Eurozone there was a huge disagreement between countries like Greece and Germany. Pre-existing problems were exposed. The EU also proposed an EU wide project to greater regulate the banks to stop that ever happening again. This would.also have affected banks future profits. Some of the figures most opposed to this went on to bankroll the UKs Brexit campaign which by a remarkable coincidence meant bank regulation never happened in the UK.
Now, in 2025 we are in a situation in the UK where public services are absolutely groaning after years of underfunding. Even if I paid twice the tax I do now, I wouldn't see the improvement straight away because of the latency in the system. So people on reasonably good salaries who aren't super wealthy (not millionaires) find themselves bearing a tax burden that feels too high. Meanwhile young people and those on lower incomes saw worst prospects for improving there own lots between 2008 and 2020 than at any point since WW2. But some people did make lots of money. And that money has been spent on huge media campaigns pointing the finger at immigrants, Muslims, feminism. America might have "recovered faster" but clearly people there weren't thrilled either. That's why you saw so many political shocks over the last 10 years (happy people wouldn't have voted for Trump)
But hey, bankers and the super rich need that money to travel to islands to abuse children on. So maybe I'm being unfair...