The core issue Net Neutrality intends to solve is the excessive market power of last mile providers. Of all of the possible ways to address that, having lawmakers regulate QoS is silly.

People act as though NN means that everyone deserves a dedicated bandwidth circuit. That's simply not what everyone gets even under NN.

Regulators should be doing things like figuring out ways to get more last mile transmission lines installed so there can be real market competition.

I also don't have a problem with an ISP selling a "Netflix and email only" internet package to someone for a big discount. Some people would rather settle for that and spend the savings on something else.

> Regulators should be doing things like figuring out ways to get more last mile transmission lines installed so there can be real market competition.

It's not clear to me why we can't or shouldn't do both. Keep NN in place until we have followed through with making the broadband market is competitive.

What exactly are these perceived downsides? Netflix is operational and seems to be doing just fine. And if an ISP outright stopped supporting it, the majority of people would immediately find an alternative ISP that did not.