I think there's a bit of a false dichotomy here (in your comment, and in a number of other comments here). The choice in tech isn't between "good life, low pay"

I think there's a bit of a false dichotomy here (in your comment, and in a number of other comments here). The choice in tech isn't between "good life, low pay" and "bad life, good pay". I can almost guarantee, in the US, if you are not already pulling down a total comp >350k, that you can find a job that will both pay you more and keep a good quality of life. I can also almost guarantee that, unless you work for one of the tiny handful of companies that are super aggressive about keeping comp in line with the market, you will never get an internal raise that will match what you can get on the market every two years. Personally, I hop about every two years. Work-life balance is super important to me, and I do not invest myself overly in my job. I have consistently scored 30-40% raises on those hops. The absolute best raise I've ever gotten internally was 14% and my boss (probably the best boss I've ever had) had to go to war for it. Even including that 14% raise and a 9% raise offered at an earlier job in similar circumstances (i.e. active fear of losing headcount after people started leaving), my average internal raise is still only around 7%. If you aren't moving, you're leaving a substantial amount of money on the table. That can be justified, but quality of life is not the justification that a lot of folks here seem to think it is.