| Although your statement is technically true, it is basically meaningless. Yes, you can always always always find somebody to do a job is your a willing to pay 10 million dollars. That means that "shortages" are impossible. It means that you can never have a shortage in any situation, because you can always pay 10 million dollars for a single visit to the doctor. But this line of logic isn't very useful when talking about "shortages". If you had to pay a million dollars for a loaf of bread, is there a shortage of bread? IE, billions of people will starve to death by next week, because they can't afford to buy food. Most people would say "Yes, there is a shortage of bread". When people talk about shortages, they are obviously talking about a shortage at a certain price point. There is no other definition of the word shortage that makes sense. A good definition that I use for the term shortage is "If the government could snap its fingers and instantly produce large amounts of X overnight, would the world be a better place"? If the answer is "Yes, the world would be in a much much better place", then that means there is a shortage of X. If the answer is "No, the world would only be a little better". Then that means that there is NOT a shortage of X. |
A company found something it could profit from more if it paid less than current market value. That is all. They are not saying there are no qualified applicants. They are not saying they want 10million dollars.
What is the case is that a business finds a resource (the perfect hire) that they wish to profit from but do not want to pay the market value for it because that would reduce profits. Rather than be satisfied with what would be an erosion of profit (or an admission of an unworkable business model) articles are posted to demand government pressure wages downward.
If you want a bread analogy, it's as if I found a cheap source of bread I can sell elsewhere at a profit but then complain there's a shortage solely because the cheap stuff isn't even cheaper.