Runit said:
Let’s stop giving them our business. That will show them
I wish I could believe you. But the reality is that "sophisticated players" are not a lucrative demographic. We know the basic strategy, some of us know and are proficient at card counting, and unless we're throwing down very large sums of money on the regular (and many of us aren't), getting money out of us is like getting blood out of a stone. And it is far easier getting money out of baccarat players in the premium gambling world.
You could make the argument that blackjack's ability to be AP'd is the reason it is so popular (the "card counters produce positive externalities" theory). But I'm not sure that is entirely true because if card counters really did produce those positive externalities then its unlikely super-zealous security would be as much of a problem.
On a global, geopolitical scale, the reality is that few policymakers want to have a policy that minimizes the consumer price of casino gambling. They want the tax revenue. So the revenue-maximizing outcome is a monopoly or oligopoly of large, glamorous casino resorts... this is also an easier sale to the voting public, since they can be promoted as "mostly for super rich foreigners" and the very policies which create excessively high prices can get justified as a form of "consumer protection" (even though they're anything but).
I don't know exactly how we can solve the issue of bad blackjack in noncompetitive markets (beyond a policy fix), but in the USA I think it is obvious that casinos will not re-institute good rules unless they see their revenue increase from doing so. Which means, basically, players need to be willing to bet more (and/or spend more time) at better-rules-casinos, and APs need to be willing to refrain from engaging in AP at these casinos and/or let these casinos use the necessary technological means to protect their games (whether that be CSMs or greatly reduced penetration).