Weird remark, but anyway; long term doesn't have to be 'great'. It can just be very long running companies. My company is 30 years old. I would say long term means something in that regard and there tons of mum and pop type places that are quite old. My old-aunts company was created in 1945 and still does very well today. Maybe we have less 'trillion$ or quit' mentality? I am happy if all my colleagues get a million euros a year for the rest of their life in my company; we don't need to be the biggest or greatest, we just need to be provide stuff people value and make money so we all can live.

I count 10 European companies on this list, and 20 US.

Maybe is not as bad as you think?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_companies_by_r...

I only count 6. Switzerland and the UK are not part of the EU. (The article is about the EU, not Europe)

> The article is about the EU, not Europe

The thread you're commenting in is about whether workers can still do good things even if they get breaks, not whether they're currently a member state.

A cursory googling says that Swiss workers get 4 weeks and UK workers get 5.6.

There are companies in Europe that are older than the US. I do sincerely think that “long term” is a viable time frame when talking about European companies. When companies grow too large the often fold. So size is not a good measure of long term sustainability.

That's a fair point.

But as a worker, do I care where companies have their headquarters? All major tech companies have offices in Europe anyway