You don't get paid based on company revenue, you get paid based on the lowest amount you (or someone you're competing with) are willing to agree to sell your labour for. That amount is going to be lower if your cost of living is lower. People earning less if they work remotely in Podunk, Idaho compared to SF is no different from someone earning less in Bangladesh than in Italy even if they do the same job.
To me, this would instead be an argument that "since engineers are equal, might as well get the cheapest one". Which is an argument I can understand, even if I don't agree.
But this would mean that your compensation would be mostly fixed, and you'd mostly look for people living in cheaper places, since this should give you a better bang for your buck. Which would mean, basically, that you'd be looking to pay en engineer in San Francisco the same as one living in a tent in Africa. If they're the same, why would you pay 100x more for the one in SF?
"Among equal engineers, get the cheapest one"