In the past decade or so, high-speed Internet access has become a necessity for many but still a distant dream for others. Mostly, speed of Internet access is assumed and not given much thought.

But that’s a mistake. While high-speed access is increasingly essential, market forces in the U.S. have resulted the rest of the world leaving us behind.

In Congress, there is debate over “net-neutrality,” the idea that all traffic on the Internet should be treated equally. This concept is at odds with the emerging idea of Internet “fast lanes,” where companies like Netflix and Amazon would pay a premium to an Internet Service Provider (ISP) to move their content at faster speeds, ahead of everything else.

Supporters of net neutrality fear that allowing fast lanes will give rich, well-established companies like Netflix and Amazon a leg up over potential competitors.

Most people realize consumers benefit from more competition, not less. This is one reason why there is growing opposition to the proposed merger of Comcast and Time-Warner Cable, two giant ISPs.

Comcast and Time-Warner defend the merger plan, noting they don’t overlap in many markets so their merger won’t harm consumers by reducing choices. But it’s already true that most Americans have only two companies to chose from when it comes to Internet service. The giant telecommunication companies, including Time-Warner, AT&T, Comcast and Verizon, have carved up the country in a way that creates little competitive pressure to improve service, increase download speeds or lower prices.

Most Americans assume that the United States — birthplace of the Internet — has world-class Internet service. But the facts demonstrate that’s far from the truth. The average Internet download speed in the United States ranks 31st in the world, behind Estonia, Slovenia and Belarus.

The average download speed in Hong Kong, the global leader, is almost four times faster than in the U.S. and in most countries download speeds are faster and prices are lower than in the U.S.

U.S. download speeds are world-class only in the few cities where Google fiber is being installed. Google, the giant Internet search company, has installed state-of-the-art fiber optic service in a few U.S. cities and is considering adding more, but the installation and regulatory process is slow.

But without Google Fiber, the established ISPs have no real competition and no reason to upgrade to offer faster speeds and more competitive prices. A recent survey found that about 7 percent of Americans have access to high-speed, fiber Internet speeds. Yet, two-thirds of parts of Asia have high-speed fiber. This puts the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage in many ways.

Considering the relative slow Internet speeds in the U.S. and the lack of competitive pressures to change that, there is growing support for the Federal Communications Commission to classify Internet access as a public utility so that there can be regulation to promote competition or some safeguards to protect consumers from being harmed by noncompetitive markets.

Compared with the days of old dial-up Internet service, most Americans believe their current Internet service is top notch. But when compared with the rest of the world, the U.S. is way behind in service, speed and pricing — all of which cost the U.S. economically.

The current Internet service market is not really competitive, it’s more like a duopoly in most cities. The lack of competition is proven by the fact of sudden changes made by legacy ISPs when Google Fiber arrives — and by how far behind the rest of the world the U.S. is when it comes to speed and price.

Instead of limiting the Internet debate to net-neutrality issue, Congress and the FCC should move to impose more competition among ISPs and classify Internet access as a utility providing an essential service — nearly as essential in today’s world as water or electricity.