I think most people get it wrong - it's not that people living in cheaper locations are underpaid. It's people living in more expensive locations that are massively overpaid. Just because a software engineer in SF can make $100k/year doesn't mean that's what the position is worth, it just means these companies are massively overpaying.
Compared to your environment, sure. However, you'll never drive a Tesla and buy $4000 road bikes when you're on $27k/y.
> Just because a software engineer in SF can make $100k/year doesn't mean that's what the position is worth
It means exactly that in a free market capitalism (and while we're not living in a pure free market, we're not _that_ far). Why would a company overpay? (Sometimes they do, but not 4x, and not consistently.) In case everyone's massively overpaying in SV, then you could just start a company there and pay people half the salaries and be extremely competitive.
But I'll easily buy a 6 bed house with lots of land, something that pretty much no one in SV can afford, so.....what do I need that Tesla for?
It is obvious that for you money equals happiness but there are people in the world that believe that not everything in life is money and status.
They value relationships, they value freedom and time, they value going to the mountains or beaches that is almost free. They value cars as a means of transport and do not need a Tesla.
Your comments speaks clearly that you have never gone out of the US and as a result you have lots of prejudices about it.
But also, companies overpay in SF because if they don't someone else will pay better and pick up the experienced technical labor. So it's an employee's market there, sort of, versus in perhaps Poland where there's less valley-level insane demand for technical labor and so companies aren't so competitive to snag that one extra person.
How do you measure it then. Because the textbook definition is "you're worth as much as the market will bear". Which is exactly what I'm talking about - do you disagree? And why would I have little experience on the topic? I worked abroad, I worked in high and low income regions - the market forces work exactly the same way everywhere.
I only brought up my accountant and prime minister to give people from outside of Poland some idea what the wages are like. So I have no idea what you're talking about, but I also guess you don't either.
It would happen between Scotland and London, but not (to the same extent) between Poland and London.
Once you move something abroad the output becomes an import which ultimately has to be balanced by an export (or mercantilist tricks which is a whole other discussion - see China for details).
The correct response would be to unionise, rather than throw hands up in the air and continue to feel exploited.
There is a shortage of skilled staff. If your current employer doesn't appreciate you, then find one that does.
Why not just find another employer which pays the rate that you want? And if you can't do that, why do you deserve that rate?
And conversely for a company: do you really want to spread out your developers over very disparate timezones, different cultures etc?
But this ignores the fact that the labour market in the whole of the US is not the same as the labour market in SV - so it is a pretty poor argument.