In some cities/towns/regions, yes, I would.

Municipal ISPs work just fine. Governments already provide (or contract with private businesses to provide) mail, electricity, water, sewage, garbage collection, roads, etc.

In an area that already has adequate service competition and coverage I don't see any reason they would want to run a municipal ISP. But state-wide laws that inhibit municipal ISPs, in order to protect the current ISP duopoly status quo, don't make sense either.

It's not like it's something that requires new taxes to run. And many utilities already have to run their own networks anyway.

Well, no. T-Online (and T-Mobile) as companies owned majorly by the German government have shown well that they always operate worse than competitors.

Just like DHL (also owned by the German government in majority) has shown the same.

That argument assumes that there are only two ways to organize productive activity: capitalist profit-seeking corporations or national governments. Anarchist thought, for example, rejects that premise.

my comment was meant to negate the idea that a person can not oppose aspects of something if they at all partake in that something. engaging in capitalism -- creating a product, buying food, owning an iPhone -- is a decent indicator for how a person would like to live but that doesn't mean the system that enables their current lifestyle is the one they would choose to participate in.

They do fine in many places. Sasktel (Canada) is pretty good compared to what is available in some other provinces.