What are your thoughts on this?

High-speed Internet access has become an expectation for those of us who live in metropolitan areas, but many citizens of our state and our country live in remote areas where high-speed Internet access is either very expensive or not available at all. Some are arguing that this technical disadvantage for those who live in rural areas also presents an economic disadvantage which results in "the rich becoming richer and the poor becoming poorer".

Some industrialized countries have declared high-speed Internet access to be a fundamental right of their citizens and have taken steps to ensure that networks with sufficient bandwidth would be within reach of nearly all of their citizens. In fact, according to two 2009 articles on CNET (http://news.cnet.com/8301-17939_109-10374831-2.html (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.) and MSNBC.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30386419/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/t/estonia-build-high-speed-internet-network#.TpiYopusc7I (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.), Finland and Estonia are currently working to have 100Mbps access speeds available to practically everyone within their borders by 2015.

Should having high-speed internet access be a fundamental right? According to a 2010 article by BBC News, many people believe that it should be, but what do you think about this issue? And related to this issue, should governments require providers to offer Internet access options to those who live in remote areas at the same prices as those paid by those who live in or near major metropolitan areas, essentially raising the majority's cost of Internet access?