You seem to agree title inflation is common and you say fancy titles are given out like candy. If everyone easily gets promotions, what does that say about someone who’s not given such easy candy?
Where I work, pay is based on skills, experience, quality and value of work produced. I can call myself "programming super-god" if I like but that has no effect on my pay. Some companies just have pay levels and you're an L5 or whatever.
In a world where pay is tied to public-facing titles I can look around, recognize that I'm doing more and better work than people with a higher title than me, and push for a promotion.
In the world you describe (absent salary transparency), how do you know if you're getting underpaid relative to peers?
So you are ignorant to the reality that it is meaningful and has some value, that value is debatable and subjective, but it can and does have actual value. You're stuck on your own narrow minded meritocracy mindset, which is noble and pure, but also extremely naive to how the world actually works at large.
> Where I work, pay is based on skills, experience, quality and value of work produced.
Reducing to N=1 doesn't help your argument. Quite the opposite. I think we're all in agreement it would be convenient if titles and levels were normalized across the industry / globe but they never will be. I'm glad you found an employer that works for your preference. But if you ever search widely for another job, and want to optimize your earnings, a big title will come in handy and have value. You can stick to your guns, but you are experiencing an opportunity cost by being stubborn on this and not seeking bigger titles. You'll never know how much more you could have been paid had you came with a big title and made them think you were worth way more than they wanted to pay.