> importance of their work, their intelligence, the hours put in, their title or the length of their education or the risk Well one of these is not like the ot

> importance of their work, their intelligence, the hours put in, their title or the length of their education or the risk Well one of these is not like the others. The article clearly focuses on the financial risks. It's destructive to suggest that risk and especially deceptive risk presentation is somehow ignorable and not to worry about it. You can't just let the supply and demand model play itself out. Hostile actors work against you and exploit information advantage to skew the supply and demand [1]. Teachers, construction workers or software engineers - it doesn't matter what your job is. Here we talk about stakeholders in a company. It just happens some software engineers are, and as such you should understand where the numbers come from and what's the value of all that since it's part of the compensation. There are plenty of devs out there who work for no money at all. It's pointless to go into philosophical discussion about jobs, it's outside the scope. This is purely a subject for stakeholders. [1] http://www.borooah.com/Teaching/Post%20Graduate%20Microeconomics/Week%203_Adverse%20Selection.pdf http://www.borooah.com/Teaching/Post%20Graduate%20Microecono...