You’re not the one paying the “small price”, the planet is the one paying it. Given that, I don’t think you get to say if it’s a small price or not. But as i’ve addressed in a root level comment - this is not an either-or situation, we can have both e-waste recycling and even better anti-theft measures: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34506120

I get to say anything I want. In any case the planet is reaping other rewards from the deal, and the tradeoff is worth it. And ewaste does not go away in any scenario other than humans going away, which is not on the table as far as I know.

Of course, you can say anything you like. I meant say as in “decide”.

What rewards is the planet reaping from “the deal”?

Healthier societies with more effective constructive creative people who can solve problems and do wonderful new things.

The current mass extinction that's happening doesn't really care if you have a "healthy society". Even if we decide we only care about humans, widespread lung issues, massive deaths in the wake of heat waves, and of course cancer...

New body plans are coming in a few decades, so it’s ok as long as we can make it that far.

Millions won’t.

Death is a natural part of life. There is a term for what you are doing. The term is “pearl clutching.”