Yes. Exactly. This bothers me as well. People live out in nowwere and expect to get internet, water, transportation at the same price as people in citys. I see no reason fir this, specially because living rualy is not even disrable for the envoirment.
If no private company want to lay down high speed internet you have to reavalute if you prefer to live rually or if you want top high speed internet.
The fact is that there are costs and benefits to living in a rural area. Rent is cheaper. Land is abundant. Infrastructure is more expensive. Similarly for city folk, land is expensive, rent is high, but economies of scale make fast internet feasible.
There is no compelling reason that people in cities should be subsidizing rural people, apart from rural congresscritters attempting to buy votes. And if there were such a reason, lets do it honestly: raise taxes in cities and funnel the money directly to rural areas.