So in this case, my objection that we're enforcing these "artifical restrictions" very unevenly, based on whether congress declares a "labor shortage" in a particular field.
And ultimately, the only way to truly remove the "Artifical restrictions" you're talking about would be unlimited immigration on a global scale. I actually love the idea as a long term goal for humanity, but for the moment, I think it would be insane for the US to pursue open borders, and even more so if the rest of the world doesn't reciprocate.
I think the difference is that there are enough people who can do some jobs who are willing to work for what other people are willing to pay, so there's no perceived need for people to try to get more. On mowing lawns, though, perhaps you aren't aware that in many places in the US, lawns are mowed primarily by immigrants who are willing to accept a lower wage than legal citizens would be (since they risk deportation if they complain about not getting minimum wage, or think they do).
The real problem is that there's no way to know what the right answers are once you start trying to manage the economy rather than letting it go. Each attempt to solve a problem with force causes other problems, which are then ripe for solving with more force, but at each stage, the problems that you're going to cause are mostly invisible compared to the problem you're solving.
It's pretty impressive that the US culture and governmental structure has resisted this trend as well and as long as it has, but at some point, things are going to go very badly more quickly than most people who haven't experienced such a thing can imagine. We can all hope that isn't soon. :)
the government has created a visa for migratory crop picking, though.
Another possibility, though, is that lawn mowing has no giant corporations, and hence no industry-wide employer lobby to push for visa programs.
How much you pay an employee has only a tangential relation to the value that employee produces for its customers (both internal and external).
Only so far as it could contribute to a cost structure that could lead to a rev model that a consumer doesn't find value in. (COULD being operative because many businesses have a few of these top-heavy roles that are absorbed elsewhere).
If you can't innovate your way out of it, and you can't scale your way out of it, you have no choice but to raise prices. If that breaks the camels back, so to speak, we have a name for that: It's called a poor business model.
This applies to materials and services as well. Scarcity in Economics 101.