I liked the idea that cities/towns should own their own last-mile infrastructure, then you get the choice of ISP you wish that plugs into your area instead of me being forced to use X ISP because they're the only monopoly that could afford (or had enough influence) to lay fiber. Since it's local you retain some level of control over it as well instead of a nationalized abstraction.

I wonder how MVNOs for cell phone services came to be. There you have multiple companies competing while using the bigger networks. I would like to see the same for ISPs where Comcast would rent their infrastructure to other companies that then can compete with different plans. 1

Be careful using mvno as the model. In the US, many of the mvnos have shaky financials and often end up as a subsidiary of the carrier (Virgin Mobile USA, Boost, Cricket)

At least there is some competition and variation in plans. For example, I have a 2GB plan with unlimited voice and text on T-Mobile. Not bad.

This is somewhat close how Germany handles it. When the monopoly of the state-run telephone service was destroyed, Telekom was allowed to keep the physical lines, but had to rent them out to any company that wants them, at a rate set by an official oversight organization. I think this was a great success.

How could we be more comprehensively monitored than what ISP’s and the NSA are willing and able to do?

"Because we should trust government to provide Internet access?"

Prove that is part of it, or stop lying.