Contrived arguments about whether something is a tax or a user fee has been a feature of politically motivated spin since basically forever. I would say any essential service (like access to internet, roads, healthcare, etc…) that requires for money to be paid to the government is taxes. There is no way to get access to the internet without paying these taxes to the government, and your suggestion to implement a private-land-only infrastructure is silly. There is no contiguous area of private land between my house and an ISP POP that doesn’t cross over publicly owned land. That’s almost certainly true for you too, and anybody else who’s reading this.

> I would say any essential service (like access to internet, roads, healthcare, etc…) that requires for money to be paid to the government is taxes. There is no way to get access to the internet without paying these taxes to the government, and your suggestion to implement a private-land-only infrastructure is silly. There is no contiguous area of private land between my house and an ISP POP that doesn’t cross over publicly owned land.

If it's both an essential service and effectively impossible to implement without making use of public land (and I don't disagree), then there's no reasonable basis for it to be a private industry operation at all. These ISPs can't have it both ways.