The example I gave was for my local market and the 1.5m/128k ADSL is through Verizon... And costs $48/month (currently). I have neighbors who use it (and who come to me when they have issues). They could offer more, though they would have to upgrade the local loops where I live as we all seem to be on ancient switching systems that are from the 70's. They accepted hundreds of millions in subsidies from my state over a decade to spread 'broadband internet' across my state, and this is the result.
Time Warner was the other offering 25m/512k cable internet and are the only ones who seem to want business. Though they are, slightly, more expensive at $55/month. Unlike DSL offering though they have upgraded to newer and faster speeds since launching their service. I've seen it go from 5m/384k, to 10m/384k, and then jump all the way to the current 25m/512k last year. I'm quite worried Comcast will decide to drop my area, degrade our service, or increase prices... Possibly the last of those two at the same time.
3G/4G isn't even on the table here as many areas don't get 3G service let alone 4G. I came name the only couple miles of 4G service within 100 miles of where I live. Even on the college campus I work at currently and which leases out towers for all the big cell providers to use, the gear they put in is only 3G. Relying on cellular service is not an option in my area.
I wanted municipal internet back in 2000-2003 before anyone offered broadband in my area, but about that time the communications companies got laws passed in my state making muni run networks illegal. As I said in the original post, I think the state should simply take the physical lines and equipment off the hands of these companies and let the ISPs sell service over them for fixed fees that then go back into supporting the physical infrastructure. If it's handled at the local and state level worried about 'spying' (even though it's already done) should be minimized.