I think people focus too much on money. Yes, someone could take a HCOL salary and move to a LCOL area but they might not actually like living there. Quality of life does matter and I don't see a meaningful number of people moving to a place they hate just to save some dough.
Some will but the percentage remains to be seen. I hope we get to a place where people can choose what they want and aren't forced to adopt someone else's preference.
It also all depends on the office setup and where people reside. If someone has a casual bike ride to an office they probably don't mind the commute, v.s. if someone has to take an hour + BART ride without seating, packed like sardines and some homeless junkie smoking crack, they probably feel differently.
COL adjustments don't make a lot of sense when you dive a little deeper. Just because you reside in a HCOL area doesn't mean you actually encounter high costs. If you happen to have family in the area and you live for free, you still get paid a high salary without the expenses. Similarly, if you choose to have 5 roommates you also don't encounter the high costs. Why should someone be penalized if they simply choose to live somewhere else geographically? If you work remotely, where you work shouldn't affect your compensation, compensation should be based on value added to the company.
Well said. My lifestyle choices have incurred a high cost — I’ve always lived alone when possible.
The idea of an employer daring to adjust my pay because they think I should get a roomie (or make any other decisions about my cost of living) is crazy.
Over the years various employers have entered into negotiations, mid employment, to change the terms of my contract. More often than not it’s been a good opportunity for both parties to seize the opportunity for some fresh air — new job for me somewhere else, new chump for them!
