I think unethical behavior exists in all classes, with the caveats:

1. Those who think they can away with it, i.e. the wealthy that can afford the accountants, lawyers, etc, who know the system and how far they can push things, are more likely to act this way.

2. Those who have the most to gain/lose when things get tight, as stated by another poster.

Survival of the fittest? Personally I think at its base level is the drive to reproduce, i.e. sex, that accounts for the male behavior. He with the most power (money) gets the girl(s). But that's a different topic I suppose...

Posted with Thaivisa App http://apps.thaivisa.com

I find the title misleading - shouldn't it be 'are rich people less ethical' . . . because saying 'more unethical' sounds weird and presumes that the non-rich are unethical . . . in other words, everyone is unethical.

Hmm . . .

They're also more unethical in the following senses: happy to use cheap labour, don't care about the dodgy background of any product (or food) they're buying, happy to use name, notoriety and money to get what they want, do not treat people equally.

I have many wealthy customers in the UK who really care about the background of the product (Fairtrade etc.) and who also donate a fair bit to charity. When do you hear of rich Asians really donating to proper charities and not just at the Wat or for a Louis Vuitton at the Vogue/Tatler Annual Charity Dinner?

Hmmm, are you suggesting that rich Europeans are more ethical than rich Asians? The article was clear in that unethical behavior amongst the privileged was consistent among all ethnic backgrounds. I would tend to agree with that.

I find the title misleading - shouldn't it be 'are rich people less ethical' . . . because saying 'more unethical' sounds weird and presumes that the non-rich are unethical . . . in other words, everyone is unethical.

Hmm . . .

I have no idea why the author of the article titled it the way she did.