I don't have a problem with people having smartphones - or laptops, or tablets - the production of which all rely heavily on exploitative labour in LMICs - my point was that would the NY Times be concerned about the working poor if it wasn't American working poor in relation to the article?
I don't have a problem with people flying either, or eating meat for that matter. Because, like most people, I'd be a hypocrite. I don't live a perfectly ethical life - nowhere near.
What I have a problem with is people picking and choosing what they're holier than thou about based on their choices, and their lifestyle, whilst ignoring all the things they do which contribute to this shitty world where exploitation, be it of animals or people is totally out of control. It's the intent - "meat is not essential, therefore no one should eat it, but all my exploitative purchasing habits/lifestyles are totally justified."