“This is what this job is worth to me. Are you in?”
That’s true whether it’s a $250K/yr offer or a $36K/yr offer. In the vast majority of cases, the alternative to a company offering $36K/yr is not for them to offer $250K/yr but rather to not offer a job at all.
If anything, I’d argue that a company offering a consistent salary for the job anywhere in the world is acting more ethically than one offering $X in Mumbai and 5*$X in Paris.
If it’s the former, then maybe consider that other people don’t see the issue as the same [obvious problem] as you do, instead of assuming that they do, and then basing further reasoning on that bad faith assumption.
If it’s the latter, then continue doing what you’re doing.
It has apparently become fashionable to voice a concern in response to a solution to that concern to criticize the solution. You're effectively complaining that transparent pricing will result in information asymmetry or exploitation.
Subsiding unprofitable industries doesn’t have a great track record in any case. The Argentine and Indian auto industries disappeared as soon as protective tariffs did, at great cost to the taxpayers who subsidized them for decades.
>> We are anchoring our salary to the 60th percentile of San Francisco, CA
Not the same. Quite different.