Plus, I'd be very surprised in Comcast Business was actually using separate infrastructure.
If your ISP sells you a service of X Mbps (and if they want to be more precise, X packets per second and X total data transferred in a month) you should be able to use it for any purpose you want. The purpose or content of said packet don't suddenly make it take more network resources.
If ISP's networks suddenly can't cope because people start using what they've paid for then it's on them and they need to price it accordingly and market it more honestly.
Population density is why: Singapore is ~8400 people per square kilometre, while the US is a scant 36 per square km. That’s two orders of magnitude difference. Everything else follows from this (high prices, single provider, spotty last mile service, etc.)
Finland has less population density than USA and manages to solve these issues; NYC has more density than Singapore and still has the same problems with internet access and pricing as the less dense areas of USA.
No, it's not about the population density, the key difference is in the lack of competition.
What? People are paying the infrastructure costs through their internet bill. If the ISP is pricing it wrong or is mis-representing what they're selling then it's the ISP's fault and not the customers'. The ISP is free to change prices and/or change their marketing to represent the true nature and capability of the service they're selling.
Sign me up.