Earlier quoted context omitted.
An actual shortage would, by definition, mean that, at least in the short term, no amount of price pressure would meet the need, because of a supply constraint that prevents response to price level changes. For jobs that need to be done on site and take significant time to acquire necessary skills, national borders can be a supply constraint for labor if there is an absence of local talent sufficiently qualified but…
> An actual shortage would, by definition, mean that, at least in the short term, no amount of price pressure would meet the need, because of a supply constraint that prevents response to price level changes. There are over a million Arabic speakers in the US, hundreds of thousands of whom are legally able to do the work. I strongly suspect that a number sufficient to handle the city of Detroit's translation needs co…
That's an argument that there is not an actual shortage (which, I suspect, is correct), not that an actual shortage could be addressed by bidding higher with wages (which it could not, by definition.)
> What exactly are you arguing here?
Your incorrect statement about an actual shortage being addressable by bidding higher with wages.
> In what situation would a shortage truly require importing labor at low wages?
I wasn't arguing that would occur, but since you ask, a sudden supply constraint or demand surge (perhaps from a debilitating epidemic that spreads particularly well in conditions associated with a particular job) in an essential, common, but not completely unskilled job might require that to avoid massive economic disruption.
> As they are now, H1Bs suppress wages, especially immigrant wages.
I'm not sure I agree with the “especially” part, but, yes, I've said elsewhere in the thread that that is what H-1Bs do, and by design even if it's not the sales pitch.