But that's also where some of the poorest people live! You know, the people who would benefit the most from having jobs like this.

>The reason your analysis doesn’t lead you to thinking this is a raw deal for the children involved is because in a sense, it’s not. Given the economics of their lives, this is, relatively speaking, a good deal.

It is! In the 90s senator Tom Harkin proposed the Child Labor Deterrence Act:

>According to Harkin's website, "This bill would prohibit the importation of products that have been produced by child labor, and included civil and criminal penalties for violators."

This was a bill that never got anywhere, but simply talking about it had this impact:

>In 1993 employers in Bangladesh' ready-made garment (RMG) industry dismissed 50,000 children (c. 75 percent of child workers in the textile industry) out of fear of economic reprisals of the imminent passage of the Child Labor Deterrence Act.

>UNICEF sent a team of investigators into Bangladesh to learn what came of the children who were dismissed from their factory jobs. UNICEF's 1997 State of the World's Children report confirmed that most of the children found themselves in much more deplorable situations, such as crushing stones, scavenging through trash dumps, and begging on the streets. Many of the girls eventually ended up in prostitution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Labor_Deterrence_Act

Things might be different nowadays, but people from poor countries don't have as many opportunities. Taking some away, might be taking all they have.

Even if you take away this public infrastructure you would get private infrastructure in its stead.

But that's exactly what happened with the iPad though. Apple's competitors had already released tablet-type devices for years, they just weren't really ready as consumer products: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Tablet_PC

Russia attacking its neighbors goes back centuries. And for that matter, so does western Europe and the US. If there's no formal alliance, then the western powers would be a threat too.

>Revenue, operating income, and cash flow metrics undersell how Apple is performing in the marketplace from a new user perspective.

If anything, then the financials oversell their position in the market. Apple is not in the lead in (almost?) any category in the number of users. They are the premium product, but a premium product that many users want to avoid, rather than can't afford.

But ultimately being second has been very smart by Apple. It has allowed them to not be punished by regulators for their (previous) bad behavior.

Regardless whether the strategies are bad or not, banning contraceptives should never be on the table.

>As a parent I find the environment extremely child-hostile.

It might be child-hostile, but is how child-hostile the environment is actually a consideration? The situation for having children has never been better, but birthrates are some of the lowest they have ever been.

In some ways it does though. Some industries corner the market through regulation. Ie it's impossible for a new competitor to start up that follows all the rules and it's that way by design. The only way to break into that market is to break the rules or buy out an existing business.

People would benefit from living in smaller houses when it comes to heating too. Should we legally mandate small rooms with claustrophobia-inducing celling heights?

People like different things. Some people like their pickups. Maybe they find their size more convenient and comfortable. We don't know that. We do know that people made that choice out of their free will.