The low cost of entrance created quite a competition and kept prices low. Gradually many such micro-ISPs were merged or bought by bigger companies and quality gradually improved. The possibility of competition never disappeared and eventually it forced all major ISPs lower prices.
The reason why airlines sometimes are so anal about scrutinizing passport or visa status of international passengers is that they have to pay enormous fines if a passenger in question is refused entry into a destination country due not having a proper passport or visa. It is an airline's job to check if a passenger has these in order and if the airline fails to do this then they will be fined at least $15000 and probably even more. The airline licence to fly to international destinations usually comes with such conditions.
Visa rules are complex and constantly changing so they may refuse boarding in complicated cases where a passenger appears to be violating some rules. In most cases it is indeed the fault of a passenger. For example, when visiting the US under visa waiver program one has to have a return ticking within allocated time. Also a visa waiver cannot be used when flying to the US in transit and then taking ground transportation to ultimate destination in Canada. Many passengers forget about this and then they blame the airline when they are not allowed to board the plane.
But in some cases it is clearly the fault of airlines who is not aware of some rare exception or recent changes in immigration rules. Nobody's perfect. In such case I would recommend a passenger to study the entrance rules and be ready to explain them to airline's representative and refer to authoritative sources. I have heard cases when people have successfully received reimbursement from the airline for their inconveniences including additional hotel bills etc. because they were unjustly refused boarding.
No other species have done what humans have done. It makes any biologic comparison meaningless when discussing human culture, economy, science etc. It is one of the most basic logic fallacies called "Appeal to nature" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature".
Nope, "life always worked" is not how economy has ever worked since humans climbed from the trees and started to organize societies. It is all conscious intellectual construct. Some systems are better than others (capitalism vs. communism) but every one is created and continuously tinkered by careful deliberation.
I have no problem having some income inequality as long as it creates the most efficient system for growth. It is not happening at the moment. 20% unemployment in some parts of Europe is obscene. Unemployment among young people is almost 50% in certain areas. Something needs to be done and the richest people has the greatest power and possibility to rectify the situation. But as they are relatively wealthy they don't feel the pressure. They don't feel the pain of young people whose dreams are crushed by inability to find meaningless employment. It is the responsibility of us, 99% to exert pressure on them to do something.
Just do whatever that leads to economic recovery and growth and more income equality.
But don't mix up morality with legality, please. When bankers engaged in reckless risk taking and bankrupted us all in the process, it is hard to find a law against them but morally they were thieves in the direct meaning of the word.
If you didn't have to work so hard, you'd have more time to be depressed.