Net Neutrality in a fun, easy to understand webcomic nutshell:

http://theoatmeal.com/blog/net_neutrality

TL;DR: Dismantling Net Neutrality only helps telecom companies by allowing them to throttle, block, or redirect web traffic from sites that don’t pay extra money to the ISP.

Example: say two companies vying for the same audience have websites. Company A is a small startup and company B is well established. Without net neutrality, company B can pay an ISP extra money to throttle or even block entirely, all access to company A’s website and stymie any competition (and A can’t do anything because they don’t have the cash flow to compete financially/pay the ISP money to be unthrottled or unblocked.)

With Net Neutrality, it ensures that all websites are equally available to all users.

No.

Right. And as a Comcast customer, I already have tiered bandwidth fees. If I want faster internet, I pay the higher "Blast" fees. If I don't, internet bandwidth is lower, and things like Netflix and YouTube load slower, and thus in lower resolutions.

What this whole situation is about is having ISPs limit access to websites, not their bandwidth. The internet has become a utility for many people. If my electrical provider said "We're now going to limit all power that goes to Sylvania branded lightbulbs instead of Westinghouse. If you want power to be sent to Sylvania bulbs, you'll have to pay for a different tiered power service." That's what abandoning Net Neutrality would be like. Instead, I pay a fee for the amount of electricity my home consumes. More electricity, the higher my bill. Likewise, the more bandwidth I pay for from my ISP, the faster my internet is. They shouldn't have the right to regulate what sites get priority. Same goes for telecom companies. I pay for X amount of gigs of usage, I shouldn't have to pay for what sites they allow me to access.

And my ISP is a service with bandwidth I consume--be it mobile where I pay per gigabyte, or at home, where I pay for higher/slower speeds. I pay for access to a service, their job is to grant me access--not chicken little me around and tell me what websites I'm allowed to visit. Same with a power company. It's their job to provide me with power, not tell me what I can and cannot use my power for. That's the argument I'm making. Neither should have the right to tell me how I can use the services that I've bought.

Since I graduated college in 2014, I applied to approximately 100 jobs. All entry level, and I wasn't picky. NONE of them allowed me to fill out an application "in person." Everything was done online from uploading of resumes, filling out applications, even personality tests. Consider yourself lucky that you'd be able to find work in a similar field without the internet, but for literally everyone else in the United States, it's virtually impossible. Time has marched forward, and online applications are pretty much the only way.

As an aside, that's why I still believe libraries are still incredibly important in today's society. My tenure working at a school, it's amazing to see how many families struggle to provide basic needs--many of them don't even have computers in their homes, let alone access to the internet. Many of those low income students rely on the school library to do just about everything. Often, they'll find themselves at a public library for free computer and internet access that they can't receive at home.

It's amazing how much we take certain technologies for granted these days, but they've become cornerstones of our lives. They're absolutely necessary.