Did you ever wonder why recruiter "opportunities" are rarely located in attractive cities? Recruiter "opportunities" mostly seem to be in locations described as ...
..."A great place to raise a family".
What this truly means is - there is really nothing else to do in that place except raising a family! Maybe watching satellite TV. It's a guarantee for boring. If you are married and like the countryside, you may consider it, but if you are single and looking to meet someone, or if you enjoy theater, opera, live music, cafes and similar aspects of urban life, don't even think about it. If you hear "a great place to raise a family" - run!
Did someone ever describe New York City or LA or Boston or Miami as a great place to raise a family?
...having "Low pollution" - sure, rural areas have low density, low concentration of cars and therefore low pollution. Did pollution ever bother you when visiting Manhattan?
...having "Low crime" - sure, the last few criminals fled the place due to boredom.
And last, not least, recruiters always add that sentence that the location is "a great place to build a practice" - apparently just the fact that they are offering a job and are willing to shell out 20K is sufficient proof of that. But please do not ask for any real proof, such as a marketing analysis. Sentences like these are just thrown in to make you feel better.
"The function of recruiters is to fill the less desirable jobs"
And the next time when a recruiter calls, stop and think "Do I really want a less desirable job?"