Sure, but if your perspective is that you want to design something compel-ling enough that people would send you that money, then maybe it's not so bad.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that perspective though, as the benefits can easily be worth it to the individual. Consider that in many places smartphones are the only gateway to the Internet, and that having access to the Internet (and all the productivity that entails) can easily be worth more than 10% of discretionary income.

As one example: https://foodtank.com/news/2015/01/five-ways-cell-phones-are-...

You're comparing smartphone to no smartphone at all, which is (unintentionally, I realize) a srawman version of what I'm talking about.

I'm not saying that people shouldn't get a mobile or smart phone at all. I'm criticizing planned obsolescence, "free replacements" and other consumer-hostile policies that are designed to try and force or trick people into spending vastly more money than they would need to if they were simply after an Internet-equipped mobile device, and were allowed full agency as consumers.

I do way more meaningful things on the internet with my laptop than my phone. Not all internet access is the same opportunity.

ok but what is your alternative to the capitalist model?