Having lived in countries that separate access/transport from bits, this is the way to do it (UK, Japan, etc.) Transport is like water or electricity - it should be provided like a public utility. Internet services should be competitive with different options or packages, etc. This allows for real competition whereas the US has quasi/defacto monopolies for Internet in most markets.
I just don't see how the US would get from where they are now, to a future where access to the Internet is a utility and services are the competitive layer.
The fact is ISPs are just a gateway, they shouldn't have any say where the bits come from or end up. They're just the middleman looking to extract more money for zero benefit to consumers.
It's not perfect, but I (in the UK) have the choice of around 10 ISPs where I am right now, and two of those use totally separate infrastructure from the others.
I'm on 200Gbps with no data cap for £45. Seems overwhelmingly better that what the US customer has right now.
It depends. Mobile data is far, far cheaper in the UK and France. I can’t speak for cable/DSL internet pricing but wouldn’t doubt that it’s also a better deal. Australia has insane internet pricing.
I think the point was the zeal that the UK government has in blocking and controlling website access. I'm sure we'll see that here as well - Comcast and Verizon will be glad to block whatever the Trump administration wants in return for even less regulatory oversight (as if it could get any less).
I just don't see how the US would get from where they are now, to a future where access to the Internet is a utility and services are the competitive layer.