[imgabe]

Yes? The vast majority of people are able to buy Internet service and it is not a significant percentage of income, even for people with a low income.

Do you know of people taking out second mortgages on their house or drowning in debt to afford Internet service?

The flip side of the equation is that if a business is to exist, it has to set a price that people are capable of paying. Yes, sometimes with supply constraints they can charge more, but charge too much and nobody will be able to buy, which means $0 revenue for the business.

[chii]

> The vast majority of people are able to buy Internet service and it is not a significant percentage of income

how did you know that the cost of such a service is not way overpriced compared to the cost of production?

Are there really many ~sandwich providers~ISP that you can compare it to? Or are the prices just taken because there's no alternative, and that ~sandwiches~internet access is needed for living?

[imgabe]

The cost of production is irrelevant. The sale price is determined by the supply and demand on both sides (supply of the product, and supply of money available to pay for it).

A market like ISPs is subject to natural monopoly because of the physical nature of running wires to houses. A true free market would see any competitor free to run their own wires and offer a service, but we don't allow that. We kind of did in the early days of electricity when people just strung up wires wherever they liked. It led to a lot of people getting electrocuted.

If there is really a large margin available for a competitor to undercut, someone will find a way to do it. And, as predicted, people are with options like Starlink and 5G hotspots becoming viable.