[epicureanideal]

It's a way of justifying keeping salaries as low as possible for engineers, but somehow managing to cough up more money in some locations. An equally good engineer in Chicago should be worth the same amount as an engineer in SF, but they're paid less... simply because the employer has more negotiating power in both cases. In both cases, the employer pays enough to give the engineer a reasonably good living for the local cost of living, because that's what's needed to incentivize them to work... a natural minimum incentive. If engineers demanded more, they'd get more.

[golergka]

Why the hell should he be paid the same amount of money? It's a different location, different demand for engineers — this just makes no sense.

[jeroen]

> different demand for engineers

That was the point that was made upthread. Lower demand -> no shortage -> no need for H1B.

[golergka]

Yes, and it's the same point I'm trying to defend against a communistic idea of some kind of universal "value" of labour which is equal regardless of location or circumstances.

[adrianN]

Some people think that employees should be paid somewhat proportionally to the amount of value they provide to their employer. If you accept that, then a good engineer should always get about the same amount of money, regardless of the cost of living, because they always produce a similar amount of value for the company.

[golergka]

Value is subjective: it's determined as agreement between seller and buyer. Engineer of the same ability is more valuable for an average SF company than an average Chicago company.