I mean think about it..why would the companies put all that effort and resources into laying fiber to and around a town of 10,000 people, if for only a little bit more they can lay down the fiber in a city of 10 million
By the way, they don't let municipalities build their own infrastructures. It's "anti-competitive." Any company that is profitable enough is acquired, otherwise they will charge you an arm and leg just to use their cables.
The focus on "wealthy" neighborhoods is called redlining. These three guys I just introduced you to don't care about poor people. They only want to charge as high a price as possible for the people who can afford it. They're not too worried about actually building a good network (ie fiber optics, instead of their 100-year old coaxial cables designed for telephones).
Just thought I'd chime in and clarify that.
The nature of the last-mile problem means that the only way you are going to get more than one cable company and more than one phone company to compete is to treat them like electrical utilities and either regulate their rates or force them to share their lines with competitors.
Wireless broadband solutions don't have this last mile problem, so don't need to be regulated in the same way. Their Achilles Heel will always be latency, which is why I don't think they are a long-term replacement for wired connections.