Every employer believes they pay market rate and their city is the best place to live in the world. This may be true for them, but is not true for others. I hav

Every employer believes they pay market rate and their city is the best place to live in the world. This may be true for them, but is not true for others. I have seen job offers from LA shops ranging from $18k-$60k range. This entire range is very very silly. Developers and engineers are professionals. Living in a one room apartment or in someone's basement are not acceptable options. Salary needs to cover the cost of a single family house. A decent house in a safe neighborhood in LA runs from $400,000 to $2 million. Yes, you can buy in the barrio for much less. You can also rent decently and that is what most in LA do. But to attract a developer who is married and has a family and who will be leaving his 4000 sq ft house on an acre of land, that is not a good option. I agree completely that people in LA like it there and are OK with it. All I am saying is that recruitment is difficult from outside the area because nearly all developers are asked to take a huge hit on their standard of living when moving there. LA recruiters feel the low rates are justified because living in LA is considered itself to be a valuable benefit. Most people outside the area do not see it that way however. Having lived in both areas, if a company in LA is really offering bay area salaries which are $110k-$170k, then yes, they are paying market rate. But a shop in LA offering $70k or even $90k is simply not comparable to a SF job at twice that, given that the costs of living in both areas for reasonable accommodations and commutes are essentially the same. As far as free things to do, SF has LA beat by a mile.