Then you're looking for contracts from the wrong kinds of companies; standard rates for most folks with a decent amount of experience start around $100/hr, more for short contracts, maybe a little less for longer ones or preferred repeat clients.

Again, I wonder what technology areas. Having looked, off and on, for C++ contract positions, I never see anything that high, in the SF area or elsewhere. Of course, my typical search involves Dice and Craigslist. Perhaps there's a better method of finding lucrative contracts.

As someone who has done this for 5+ years now (before that 10 years at various large / medium corps. and startups), I'd advise you that you won't find good opportunities via Dice and Craigslist. Nearly all of my contracts have come from references / networking (i.e. people I worked with once who hire me back as a consultant to build something / solve a problem). You're just looking in the wrong place.

So, general statements about how contractors should make approximately double their per-hour salaried rate only apply to people with a sufficiently established network of paying clients.

I don't know, I don't really consider it "normal" or "market rate" if there isn't an open market for it.

I appreciate your wisdom, though, don't get me wrong. It just makes me question the typical advice espoused by people.

As a candidate, I would like this approach a lot because it would give me a better opportunity to evaluate the organization to find out whether it'd be the kind of place I'd like to work. A short contract is an excellent way for both sides to evaluate one another and make sure that the fit is mutual; I've worked both in places where I loved the technology but disliked the culture and vice versa and neither one is great for long-term full time employment.

Of course, that is provided that the company would be paying my standard consulting rate for the relevant 3-month period.