According to PayScale[1] and Glassdoor[2], average/median salary for software engineer in the Bay Area is around $110K, so it's tough to believe $100K is "the bare minimum".

1: http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Software_Engineer/Sa...

2: https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/san-francisco-software-en...

That's salary alone, not total comp.

Your post only mentioned salary.

EDIT: And to add more to the conversation than that curt response:

When I compare take-home pay among various jobs I tend to ignore bonuses (because they're subject to your employer's whim--you don't necessarily get them) and I tend to ignore equity (because it's typically temporary--once you vest it no longer adds to your yearly take-home). To compare apples with apples you can only really compare base salary.

That is nuts to only compare base salary. At the big 4, base salary will be <60% of total comp. It's possible that Goog will hit really tough times and no longer pay the annual bonuses and it's possible they don't offer equity refreshes. But it's much more likely that Goog's business will hold steady (or grow) and the company will want to continue attracting candidates. It's much more likely that employees get refreshes so that their pay in years 2,3 and 4 are higher than the pay they were promised at sign-on. However, it's possible for pay in the 5th year to drop if the initial grant is huge.

I think it makes sense to discount those factors, but ignoring them entirely is disingenuous.

A company offering $100k in salary + $20k in bonuses and $80k in RSUs is paying significantly more than one offering $120k in salary with no bonus or RSUs.

Also, Glassdoor tends to skew low. Here's a more reasonable database of new grad offers which average $109k base for public tech companies. [0]

[0] http://newgradsalaries.com/

Like I said, $4000 on a regular month. I spend more many months because of trips, stuff breaks, etc.

Most new grads here make $90k-110k from what I've seen. Yes, you can make more. Yes, there are companies that pay stock on top of that. Those people are not me.

I make ~$110k. Minimal benefits. No stock. I happen to work for a big company too. Not every company here pays well and many low ball as hard as they can. (And succeed at low balling)

Before this job, I made $65k. Companies low ball hard and if you can't interview well, you take what you can get.

You claimed that you make an average salary for your experience, now you're admitting to being lowballed. Which is it?

If you're not a new grad and you're only making $110k, then yes you are making under-market. I'm not disputing what you make (that'd be ridiculous), but your assertion that you're making a standard salary.