> I think the market would punish Apple sufficiently enough for something like that and government intervention wouldn't be required...

Ah yes. The invisible magic hand of free market that solves all problems. Except it doesn't. See Uber expanding its service where for a small fee you can avoid dealing with people from undesirable social class. Not exactly the same thing, but still the idea of free market promoting immoral solutions rather than eliminating them.

> At what size can/should the government step in a force companies to do things?

At a size when the society starts depending on your service for daily functioning. When it becomes essential. For example in my country it's an issue that you can't have a business without a bank account but sometimes banks just... refuse to make an account for you and your company won't function.

> For example in my country it's an issue that you can't have a business without a bank account but sometimes banks just... refuse to make an account for you and your company won't function.

But is everyone entitled to have a business? Is that written in the country's laws somewhere that everyone must be allowed to have a business?

>Ah yes. The invisible magic hand of free market that solves all problems. Except it doesn't. See Uber expanding its service where for a small fee you can avoid dealing with people from undesirable social class. Not exactly the same thing, but still the idea of free market promoting immoral solutions rather than eliminating them.

I think you are mistaking the market for the people. The market is a natural manifestation of what people want. If people want high social class drivers and are willing to pay for it...taking away the option is not going to make them not want those drivers.

This a myopia similar to the war on drugs. The government thought regulating the drug market (that is, total ban) would make people not want to do drugs. We all know how well that worked out.

The market is the messenger, don't shoot it.