Does Silicon Valley not have janitors, cooks, maids, postal workers, garbage collectors, fire fighters, teachers, or any number of other jobs which are either already low wage or increasingly insecure during an economic recession? My guess is that the only bubble is the one inside Eric Schmidt's head that makes it impossible for him to acknowledge those who share common cause with Occupy Wall Street: jobs that don't pay poverty wages, housing as a right, protection from a banking system that tax payers (yes, even those making poverty wages) had to bail out while their schools get sold out, and a government that is actually responsible to the majority rather than the minority which increasingly controls the wealth of this world. The growth of Silicon Valley, or any city for that matter, should not be taken as meaning that we have escaped poverty or unemployment. Far more likely is that the cities that boom have been attractive to business specifically because they have a surplus of low wage workers (again it takes more than engineers to make Silicon Valley run), government subsidized land, adequate transportation built with tax payer money, etc. The high unemployment rate in Santa Clara quoted in the article should give Eric pause but he'd likely just consider that of minor concern because of the fraction of residents that are not hurting (who he wants to continue attracting to the area).