Arguing with you isn't gonna bring net neutrality back so it's a waste of time. It's not my job to pick apart whatever lame conclusions you have about how our economy works
but that wasn't your original assertion.
You implied I'm part of some unspecified group of "you people" which makes my position not worthy of acknowledgement or rebuttal
It's just in poor taste to generalize and dismiss people you disagree with imo
Because the government is lazy as hell and they only censor stuff that catches their immediate attention - which I totally prefer over the ISP choosing what I can and cannot view
Give me an example of an ISP that currently censors legal content from its customers
I don't have Hughes Net anymore, but they are a prime example of a stuff internet company that limits consumers online capabilities on purpose with a data cap and throttle - the government doesn't regulate this because as a "utility" it's up to the provider to charge what they want (even if they are scamming people) *COUGH COUGH DATA PLANS COUGH*
Data caps are a garbage business practice; the way to solve it is to introduce competition to break their pesudo-monopoly in areas in which they are the only provider. Then, customers wouldn't be forced to concede to such a garbage practice.
Most if not all states in the U.S offer assistance in paying for utilities - even though utilities are a luxury most people consider them essential for their standard of living and can expect the state to help them with such thing if their salary is below the federal or state poverty level
If you're living below the poverty line, you have bigger issues than broadband access. Paying for broadband for people below the poverty line would require the money to come from somewhere, likely taxes, and I don't think most people are content to pay taxes to subsidize some social program that isn't really a necessity such as food, water, or electricity.