Earlier quoted context omitted.
The top comment is this sub thread very clearly included the words “even” to imply that while most would not assume software engineers are not exploited because they’re relatively wealthy, they are still being exploited. This very clearly implies that SEs are less exploited—there was absolutely nothing in the original comment that supports your mischaracterization of their point.
That is, other than the second of its two sentences, which reads “In fact, I think that sometimes, companies consider high pay, a license to humiliate.” What do you suggest that means? It seems to me that if high pay is a “license to humiliate” that means that highly-paid workers are due for extra humiliation.
Approximately everyone is aware that low-paid service and agricultural workers get -figuratively- shit on.
As someone who was not in the industry, I expected workers who were paid $120k, $250k, $500k, and more, per year to be treated as people who are highly knowledgeable in their field - to have their opinions carefully considered, and to be treated with respect. In short, to be treated as the Key Employees that their employment contracts often asserted (and their paychecks certainly suggested) that they are.
I was very surprised (and very disappointed) when I discovered that there are managers and businessmen who have opinions that can be roughly summed up as "I'm paying you a lot of money, so you work on whatever I say, do the work however I say to do it, and you take whatever shit I dish out without complaining. You are -after all- taking a _ton_ of my (or our company's) money, so you have no room to complain."