[Sinasina]

I think, if Fuji used a Bayer sensor a lot fewer ppl would go FF, because their lenses are good enough on Aps-c really, FF lenses in the same price bracket aren't better and are often a stop slower too, so concerns about blur quantity & noise aren't relevant.

Really? You think, just screw in a Bayer pattern and fewer people would go FF? Update your half-knowledge!

56/1.2: 890.-, same lens with 
APD 1250.-
vs.
Nikkor 85/1.8 G (same DoF, ⅔ stop slower): 550.-
Tamron 85/1.8: 770.-
Nikkor Z 85/1.8 S: Amazon offered it yesterday for 800.- and its isn't even in stock yet

23/1.4: 830.-
vs.
Nikkor 35/1.8 G: 545.-
Tamron 35/1.8: 600.-
Sigma 35/1.4: 800.- (and not even a stop slower...)

16/1.4: 870.-
vs
Sigma 24/1.4: 750.- (and not even a stop slower...)
Nikkor 24/1.8: 820.-

Actually, I don't see (to my own surprise) a difference in favour of Fuji. On the contrary, I see a lot of old lens designs (that stupid clutch is annoying because AF-C + manual focus override don't go together).

It is not possible to miniaturize a camera system and reduce it's price the same way. At best, it's somehow even, but usually making things smaller cost more.

And one word to Bayer vs. Fuji patterns: If you're unhappy with the way Adobe crap renders the Fuji file, just try a better converter, that helps a lot - Capture One is available in a special Fuji only version.

You picked some of the most expensive Fuji lenses. I was thinking more along the lines of 35mm 1.4 vs. ZA 55 1.8, 23mm f2 vs. 35mm f2.8ZA. Even the Fuji 16-55 2.8 is fairly reasonably priced, if you compare it with a decent F4 zoom from some mirrorless FF systems, like the Nikon Z. But you are totally right, if we look at the best of Fuji vs. best of FF lenses it's an inevitable loss, but you gotta pay for the difference.

As for Bayer vs. Xtrans. I have been down that road many times. It's difficult to avoid smearing with even the best democratizing algorithms. It's not even about pixel peeping, if you are someone like me who likes shooting landscapes with a lot of green in them, the lack of detail (especailly with grass) can be obvious without even needing to zoom in on a 40" screen. There is a reason why Bayer is the mainstream array on sensors. Fuji is using Xtrans to eliminate moire, which is great when it comes to advertising Fuji cameras, it's a nice buzzword even, but at the end of the day it can occasionally produce really ugly results. 

I have tried in camera Fuji jpegs, Capture One & even Irident Developer. Interestingly enough I found one method to get much better results, but it was too much work to integrate it into my workflow and it introduces new, albeit less annoying artifacts.  This involves using Darktable and selecting a different demosaicing algorithm from default.
Adobe released an update to LR classic recently, it makes things much improved, but it's no perfection by any means.