> People in the US seem to have forgotten the fact that the whole capitalist system ostensibly exists to make things better for the consumer.

No, it exists to make things better for the capitalist, which is why the socialists who named the system called it "capitalism" -- the entire system revolves around the interests of capital.

Its true that part of the sales pitch that capitalists use to the masses (who significantly outnumber them, and without whose complacency capitalism could not stand) is that it has the effect of making things better for the consumer, but that's not the purpose of capitalism at all.

Really ? I though that capitalism was an economic system in which trade, industry and the means of production are controlled by private owners with the goal of making profits in a market economy.

Clearly I need to phone up the Oxford dictionary as they say nothing about the consumer or market fairness so they must have gotten it wrong all these years...

That's highly subjective. I'd claim that by being allowed to lower prices, the carriers will probably sell more iPads, putting more people in the hands of an abusive company like Apple.

That's probably the short-term effect, however, a potential longer-term effect is hurting the iPad brand image as an elite product and status symbol, depressing demand for the particular brand.

Another potential effect is less outlets selling the iPad, because if there is the potential for others to undercut the price on the same product, it becomes less valuable item in the lineup.

Another potential effect is less sales through Apple's own retail channels if some other outlets are selling below Apple's price but Apple tries to maintain it, which could mean more sales but still less money going to Apple.

So existing customers will have their possessions depreciated and new costumers will have less places where to buy iPads.

Capitalism does not exist "for the benefit of the consumer" no more so than apples exist for the benefit of human consumption.

Free markets need not have capitalism, and vice versa, but capitalism will likely arise in any free market.

If Bob produces X, and he wants to sell X for Y dollars, how is it immoral or bad to allow others to sell X for Y dollars, but no less?

This is like saying it's "price fixing" when an app developer charges the same for his product on the play store and the App Store.

Apple did not collude with HTC; they set the price for their product.