I know you're all going to guess what I'm thinking and tell me its not type related. And this is something that is largely contingent upon historical circumstance, moreso than type. BUT, is there a chance that this is type-influenced:
When I think of businesses, I think they owe me absolutely nothing except what benefits their own self-interest. So sure, be a rude and inattentive waiter... if your restaurant is the only one around. But if I have another option, woe betide thee, for not only will I choose the other option in the future, I will mock you for being so incredible stupid.
However, other people I know tend to think that businesses owe them something that is not necessarily in their (the business') self-interest. For example, they might say, "since I have spent so much money with company x, company x should comply with my demand for y."
Note that this is a difference in emphasis: "since I have spent so much money with company x, they should comply with demand y" vs. "company x should comply with demand y so that I will spend more money with them in the future." Of course, having spent money in the past is a good indication of spending money in the future, so the two are related, and both sides of the equation are represented (even if only implicitly) in the other. So the difference is emphasis: past behavior implying present obligation vs. future benefit creating present self-interest.
So yes, thoughts? Are these two attitudes at all type related or influenced?