[saghm]

> If there really exists a market that is sustainable via the terms outlined by the court of California, why the hell isn't anyone competing in this market that famously yields no incumbent benefits?

There was a cheaper alternative for companies to provide up until now, so I don't think the current lack of this type of service proves that it couldn't exist. Companies will tend to provide the service that costs them the least in the absence of other incentives; that's why labor laws exist in the first place. The fact that child labor and unsafe working conditions used to be the norm wasn't due to it being impossible to make a profit without them, but due to companies having no incentive to get rid of them.