Contrary to a sibling comment, NN paves the way for the government to regulate what a private company can do with their IT assets, and therefore a great firewall situation.
USA is first by Nominal GDP, but second by PPP GDP (or third if you count the EU). I wouldn't declare a definitive winner based on that. And it's better to leave population out of that, because per capita the US is far behind countries like Norway or Switzerland, and at only half the GDP of Luxembourg (both nominal and PPP).
The great firewall and net neutrality are both examples of the government regulating the internet.
Edit: Just to be clear, I'm sure we all agree that our ISPs should offer neutral transmission of packets without deference to source/destination or protocol/port.
Net neutrality is the default state of computer networks (a packet is a packet), and protecting it forbids discrimination by source, destination or contents.
The great firewall discriminates by source, destination or contents.
One of the main arguments against net neutrality is disallowing offering different speed or latency depending on the type of service (VoIP, gaming, downloads), but that's false, because you can do that without looking at the source, destination or contents; you just have to compare them with other packets (as opposed to comparing them to a pre-made list).