"Prices came down when more Cellular carriers were added, I think you are not up on your options. Before with only 1 or 2 providers service was $50 minimum for almost no minutes per month. Now we have $50 minimum with hundreds of minutes per month, with lots of options to price up that scale and down (contract-less phones, for example, only exist because people couldn't afford or walked away from per-month pricing for minutes they did not use).
You can get unlimited everything for $50 a month now on some carriers....."
Again, no. Prices came "down" on cellular when networks were built out. Just as prices came "down" on internet as we shifted from dial-up to dsl/cable as those networks were built out. You'll notice that "down" is quoted in both cases, as the average bill for both services is of course more expensive today, but it is cheaper per metric.
Your example of minutes? Ridiculous. And I mean that in the purest form of the word. The idea is absolutely deserving of ridicule. Minutes aren't worth anything on cellular anymore, and the providers have known that for years. Whether a plan has 100 minutes or 10,000, it really doesn't matter to the provider, and it doesn't matter to the vast majority of users. Hence, you get charged $20 a month for SMS, a technology specifically invented to fit in to the unused dead-space around voice data, and therefore free to provide.
No, cellular has more providers per service area than broadband in the US, but still suffers from the same problem that after the initial build-out, the usability return on investment vastly decreases for any particular improvement. People are just too damn far apart here to effect enough of them at any physical upgrade point. The classic real-world physics, time and space problem, if you will.
Hey, it's also pretty funny how your $50 optional cellular utility is an example of competition lowering prices, but your $50 optional internet utility is an example of monopolies and "the man" keeping you down.
Very similar price, very similar service, very similar infrastructure, yet somehow help up as two ends of a spectrum? Huh.
"you're making some pretty big assumptions that I only believe lack of competition is to blame."
That would be why you listed "the man" as your sole reason for pricing issues, right? *winky face*
"Why? Because I only have 2 choices right now...AT&T or Comcast. There is no competition so they have a stranglehold on bandwidth and pricing."