Surely that's a tax on the consumer not the manufacturer?

True companies are just the collection agency for VAT.

Apple and the like will have to pay their local suppliers the vat if applicable on any product or services supplied but as a % of the final price we the consumer pays it would be insignificant.
But if they are in a regime where such taxes are not applied to manufacturers then as you say the only payer of tax is the consumer.

You can use the same argument with many other products.

Is a Mercedes C Class or BMW 3 Series much better than a Ford Mondeo or Skoda Octavia?

Not when you really just look at the job they both have to do. It doesn't stop people buying Mercs and BMWs does It?

Everything is relative.

Most Asians now live the highest standard they've ever lived. And working 40-60 hrs per week with maybe a week or two holiday is less than they've ever had to work, and enjoy the highest standard of living they've ever had. Most are delighted about it.

We had our heyday a generation or two ago, when we decided even working as much as 40 hours per week and having less than 6 weeks holiday is inhuman. On top of that, we decided that if we lost our jobs for any reason, it would be a good idea to get a generous severance AND continue to receive a salary from taxpayers. After all, our prosperity is never-ending. We can afford it.

So, relative to our standards, yes, it's "slave labour". But the one thing to consider is that demonstrably in this case, we can't even afford ourselves. We're too expensive and comparatively, deliver less output for higher cost.

So, whom are we left to rely on to supply so much of what we consume at prices we can afford? Whilst ironically, we consider that to be "unfair" -- and really, is it "unfair" to the Asians, or to Europeans?

That's the European way, unfortunately.

We are being sold products at prices we can afford for the reasons we all know but we are now trapped into buying products we actually do not need.
I am not sure that those who died in the fires and collapses of sweatshops and factories enjoy a better life particularly the survivors and families abandoned by the High street brands used them to manufacture their products.
We buy them just because they are affordable and because we have been conned into believing that the latest model is better and our lives would be incomplete without them.
It is not just electronics but fashion , sports equipment etc.
I am a keen golfer and have seen the market leaders bringing out a new model almost every year.
If I followed the mindset of the Apple addict I would have to rent a garage to store the so called out of date products.
We are the consumers that Apple ,Samsung etc etc do not want.
It is the parents of the 15 year old who next Christmas will demand the Xbox this or IPhone that just because it is newer than the one they received this Christmas that provide the billions of un or low taxed profits and the vat tax revenues for government.

We are being sold products at prices we can afford for the reasons we all know but we are now trapped into buying products we actually do not need.
We buy them just because they are affordable and because we have been conned into believing that the latest model is better and our lives would be incomplete without them.
It is not just electronics but fashion , sports equipment etc.
I am a keen golfer and have seen the market leaders bringing out a new model almost every year.
If I followed the mindset of the Apple addict I would have to rent a garage to store the so called out of date products.
We are the consumers that Apple ,Samsung etc etc do not want.
It is the parents of the 15 year old who next Christmas will demand the Xbox this or IPhone that just because it is newer than the one they received this Christmas that provide the billions of un or low taxed profits and the vat tax revenues for government.

Well, again, I think it's important to distinguish that buying an Apple or Samsung or Microsoft product is a choice. Paying VAT on them is not. I have absolutely no doubt that VAT collected on those products equates to 10's of billions, not pennies. So, you can argue Europeans only lose from the lower corporate taxes paid by those companies, but that would be pretty inaccurate.

Besides, it appears that your primary argument is that anyone who buys that stuff is simply stupid in the first place, and that's entirely a subjective opinion irrelevant to tax or anything else.

But perhaps your definition of utopia is when we ban all things that you consider stupid or otherwise unfair. Which oddly reflects the mindset of some of our most popular (or most despised) dear leadership.

This is quite an interesting subject. How and when did mass consumerism start?

It did not exist when my parents were younger or indeed me. Now we are "persuaded" we must upgrade to the latest gadget be it a 'phone or tablet, have the largest, latest tv, even toys are not immune.
The same applies to the clothes we wear, having to keep up with this years must have style. I suppose 'phones and tablets may be considered fashion accessories.

And not only do we fall for it we pass that mentality on to our children (or is it the other way round?)

For example I have just changed a perfectly good tv for a newer model. I didn't need to but did seduced by the marketing men. I really must stop falling for their speel.

Mass consumerism started when disposable incomes arrived.
When we were kids our parents could not afford the buy a TV etc we rented.
But once there was spare income and the product price fell we purchased.
We the consumer created the Apples etc and have fallen for the hype.
Regarding children I really sypmathise with the parent subjected to the pleas, demands from their offspring for the latest of because they do not want to be the one in their group who does not have it.

I try to be and hope to remain a functionalist, ie if it still works then do not waste money on replacing it.

Possibly when credit was made more easily available.

I doubt in the times of having to have an interview at the bank a request for money to buy an Isomething would have been met with a welcome answer.

That's part of it. The bit I don't understand is the need to replace something that is fully functional with something that does the job little or no better.
Mobile 'phones being the best example.
When offered an "free" upgrade why don't people just say no thanks I shall have a lower monthly charge instead.

Well, with any luck, we'll soon be back to the days of zero disposable income, and all will be perfect again (except for the inevitable wealth disparity that only the privileged will exclusively enjoy as a result).

I reckon that'll prevent those greedy consumerist companies, selfishly offering what people want to buy, from selling their greedy capitalist products to anyone except the remaining handful of wealthy. That'll keep it all in good company, "protect" us from ourselves, and relieve us from all the burdens it imposes on us.

Again, that's a choice. If you research the comparisons between the mobile "plans" that give you a "free" phone every couple of years, you'll find that they are shockingly expensive.

After years of being on a "plan", I chose to buy an unlocked phone and use a PayG plan - and frankly, I pay far, far less than I ever did on any such plan - including the cost of the phone.

But that's just my choice. And I find it amusing that I am daily barraged with offers to get a new iPhone for free if I just sign up for that €39.95 per month plan.

Well at the moment I'm thinking of replacing my 15 year old car I've had from new, it still gets me from A to B

Mind you I have been thinking of replacing it for 3 years so this will not be an impulse buy