The post I was responding to was about how companies want relaxed immigration rules because they make more profit. My post was responding to the fact that incr

The post I was responding to was about how companies want relaxed immigration rules because they make more profit. My post was responding to the fact that increased immigration (of high tech or white collar, both) helps people in general by increased prosperity (nothing in this post was about an emotional outburst of the conditions and welfare of immigrants). You respond by talking a non-sequitur about a bubble. It doesn't make any sense. Funny thing is, what you wrote rhetorically is exactly what happens in a crash. As a consumer you don't care whether your salary is $100K or $50K, what matters is what you can buy from your salary. If you can buy a home on mortgage on $50K salary and save for your kid's education, but can barely pay rent and groceries on $100K then the $50K Salary is higher 'real salary' (albeit a lower 'nominal salary'). Any recession is only cleared when real wages fall faster than the real prices of the goods (because only then businesses can be profitable again). According to free market economists, let wages and goods of prices fall. This will eventually clear the market. According to non-free market economists (which includes Keynesians and monetarists) increasing the money supply is the solution because it lowers the real wages (albeit keeping the nominal wage high). So at the end of a recession you still make same salary as you did at the start of the recession, but you can afford fewer goods now. This ALSO clears out the market and businesses become profitable again. Introduction of educated immigration labor would actually result in faster recovery (just like lowering of interest rates would make businesses more profitable).