If you want to argue there will be less smartphones -> less waste that seems reasonable. Some person on a tight budget drops it in water and it fizzles because water gets in the the battery maybe. Can't afford to replace it. They learn to live without a phone.
But it isn't going to cause less waste with the same utility. The market is much better than the EU at sniffing out the maximum benefit for minimum resources. Less waste is almost always moire profitable.
…something something 3M …something something oil industry …something something tobacco industry, pesticides, fast fashion, disposable products, and factory pollution
If enough food to make it to the end of the year is on the list of non-essential items then yeah I suppose there is a lot of waste out there.
> factory pollution
Where does the stuff some from without factories? Are you proposing a world where people do without whitegoods? Nobody knows how to run a factory that makes affordable goods in bulk with little pollution. The market is optimising for the most people being able to afford to live comfortably. The equilibrium that minimises waste at all costs is a world with no humans.
So fast fashion but you can't even patch your pants if they have a hole.
> factory pollution
If companies had to pay for the pollution they produce they would have to raise prices and/or find a way to produce the same while polluting less. Enforcement in a globalized world is the issue.