It's the same rational companies apply when they pay new hires more than existing staff for the same job.
Both the governments and the companies are counting on the underlings to stay put.
While it is harder to switch country than it is to switch employer, the optimal strategy for the citizen/employee is the same in both cases:
Hop to the better deal as soon as there is one available - show no loyalty, you'll never get any in return.
Google's systems were designed to index mountains of low value data at hitherto unseen scale, and they're good at that. But, to-the-second system-wide precision with full audit trails ... not so much.
You keep seeing startups with ex-Googlers that think they can "disrupt" Fintech with Google's "secret sauce" ... this tends to go badly.
I've had to clean up one of these messes where, in all seriousness, even a pre-2000 LAMP stack (never mind Java) implemented by people who understood the finance domain would have worked better.
Google's code, tooling and accompanying practices are developing a reputation for being largely useless outside Google ... and many are starting to suspect it's alleged value even inside Google is mostly cult dogma.
On the subject of relative pay, we may see a change soon.
The IT industry is dominated by bad (and overpaid) managers, where the only useful function they provide is to aggregate information and pass it up the report chain.
If ever there was a role suitable for replacing with AI it is this one.
"While there were layoffs in the tech sector over the past two years, Donna Noonan, Financial Services Ireland Skillnet network manager at Ibec, points out that most were in areas such as human resources and marketing, meaning hard tech skills are as in demand as ever."
Everyone will have a personal AI concierge, capable of consuming all their media and then re-displaying it for them with just the bits they want (no ads).
There's also AI's dark secret coming out -> it's very expensive to run.
But it's still WAY cheaper than upper management salaries, so, to employ classic MBA logic, they are the optimal staff to replace so as to maximize cost savings.
Those aren't weasel words, they're the honest truth.
In fact if you want weasel words, follow Musk (although that's more a rabid weasel ... or perhaps a hyena).
If Twitter's decline is anything to go by, one might assume that Tesla succeeded despite Musk ... just a right product at the right time ... and he got lucky.