> Everyone looking out for themselves yes, including/especially employers. maybe (or not) these employee started doing this after been burned by their employe

> Everyone looking out for themselves yes, including/especially employers. maybe (or not) these employee started doing this after been burned by their employers before. the very same that talk about the community, greater good, and being in it together but suddenly change speech when they're on the benefiting side. I've been on both side of the equation so I understand. I also have acquaintances that were too, they used to behave the same way as mentioned in the article but once they had their own company started talking the same way you do, suddenly what was acceptable for them to do is unimaginable and unacceptable behavior for other people to do. that society should not have such things. not because they changed their opinions but because their incentives are what changed, so if they go back to their previous position so would their attitude. at the end of the day, the reason people work is not because they want to, it's because they have to in order to get what they want. wanting to have employees that go above and beyond, are the most productive, the most knowledgeable, most skilled, and accept the least pay is what best for you when you're the employer. but when you play in the other camp it's the reverse: the best job is the one that demand the least out of you for the most pay. the payoff functions for the different actors roles are the not same, trying to appeal to a sense of shame, duty or merit is just a way for one actor to hijack another's perception of the game for their own benefit.