In other words: If you are willing to give me $50 for ad-free internet, that's going to cost you $100. And so on...
In the world we have, even with money to spare people will stop visiting a site in preference to enabling ads. Especially as ads get ever more intrusive and destructive of the experience while use of ad blocking continues to rise. It's not solely to get content for free, it's mostly because the ads got so damn irritating and so high a percentage of screen space and page weight. To that they ad a triple shot of tracking so they can trace you all over the web.
Too many intrusive adverts is why many get rid of cable and terrestrial TV, or only listen to BBC radio.
So do content creators prefer some money from those people, or none at all?
Now, if the content is worth it, that's different story. There have always been subscription based websites (e.g. forums with pay-to-upgrade schemes).
Why webmasters and advertisers haven't yet perfected and adopted server-side ad injections is beyond me.
Because then the advertisers have to trust the webmasters to actually show the ads and not inflate the numbers, etc
I guess most people would be willing to pay that amount in exchange for privacy.