So I'm probably one of the few people here that aren't avidly pro net-neutrality, which is only because I still don't really grasp where these sorts of arguments for net neutrality come from.

As far as I understand the issue, the rules were only put in place in 2014; the internet worked just fine before then, and there was no company widely taking advantage of the lack of formalized net neutrality like people are afraid of if these rules are repealed now. I know opinions differ, but it really seems to me that by adding more government bureaucracy to the way the internet infrastructure is handled, it's only going to slow down any innovation in the future.

To me, it's like forcing everyone to fly economy on an airplane by removing the expensive first class options, which only removes choice from people that would be willing to pay more for more expensive types of internet access. Video streaming and gaming are definitely more heavy on internet traffic than loading a few webpages, so it seems like it'd make sense to give companies the option to provide better access to certain content for a higher price. PC gamers are already a group that usually pays for more expensive PC parts and better internet access already, so giving them the option of paying for a stronger, faster, and more consistent connection to their gaming servers seems like something most PC gamers would actually be excited about.

I think it's highly unlikely, just based on the comments I've already read, that any company would be foolish enough to completely restrict content from people that don't pay enough, and any company stupid enough to try would not weather the storm just as these reactions already show. But by mandating net neutrality, it disincentives companies from investing in faster infrastructure regularly because it's going to take longer to recoup their losses on expensive network upgrades and also prevents smaller companies from forming networks because it's more expensive for them to treat all traffic equally as they're starting.

For the large part, companies already respected net neutrality anyway, so my main question is why it takes a government mandate to fix something that was never an issue in the first place and limits people's choices by being so rigidly enforced. Would people mind explaining their thoughts on all this so I can understand the other side better?