It would be a massive step backwards in my opinion and not for the better to see implementation of the draconian type laws like you're suggesting.

There is no denying that at the heart of your issue there is a very real problem. ie the slow of employment growth compared to most first world countries steady increase in GDP. Creating a disparity between the two which manifests in higher unemployment.

While potentially the cause is likely be connected to Technological changes, Apple would be just the tip of a very recent iceberg. The concept of technological Unemployment has been around since the luddites destroyed the first mechanical looms for fear of their livelihood. Mechanisation of Agricultural and mass manufacturing sectors dwarves any losses in the media industries to a point of making them almost irrelevant. In the UK in the 1800's 22% of the population worked in agriculture in the US it was 80%, by 2000 the agricultural sector employs less than 1% in the UK and 2.6% in the US. Manufacturing in the UK in 1841 employed 36% of the workforce in 2011 it had declined to 9% some of the biggest movement in this sector was in the 90's before Apple had even launched the Ipod. The main reason for this shift was mechanisation of implements and assembly lines.

The UK has been transitioning for a long time from a manufacturing and agricultural base to a services base for employment.

The point is that employment has always been in flux, change in this sector is not a new issue it's a very old one. And will likely always be an issue to some degree. Well at least till someone invents a warp drive and replicators.

If you really believe what you are saying you should lead the way by smashing your computer as the Luddites did. What your talking about isn't an Apple issue it's a computer issue. Computer and computer controlled robots are going to make the damage you're talking about look like a tickle on the balls of the workforce. The below report suggests that computers may push unemployment as high as 75% by the end of the century.

Myself, personally think there are better ways forward than becoming a technophobe, some answers are slowly emerging, some totally unknown. But if you look at history very rarely is the way forward found by going backwards.

So which is it Pumeco are you going to stand by your words and be a hypocrite? Or take a hammer to that computer you're typing on and save the workers.

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/50-percent-unemployment-robot-economy-2013-1

Excerpt:

Smarter computers mean that any mid-paying job that involves a routine: data entry, number crunching, operations, and so on, will be replaced as well, which will remove a big piece of the approximately 7 million business and financial operations jobs that exist in the United States. 

When you add all of that up, some think 50 per cent unemployment is optimistic. Software entrepreneur Martin Ford predicts something closer to 75 per cent unemployment by the end of the century. “The vast majority of people do routine work,” Ford says. “The human economy has always demanded routine work.”  And eventually, that work won’t be done by humans.