Being a developer you should really know the difference between "running speed", "network speed", and that total perceived speed has never been under your complete control. end user machines vary in power, end users have various latency and throughputs, networks get congested, etc.
But you are right, an internet without net-neutrality sucks balls.
I know, but now we can't even manipulate those things for better performance. You can have the best server, network and code but it won't matter if the provider doesn't give you preference. That's the issue. Takes what little control we have, as developers, away.
In fact, their proposal is that you'll have even more control. Just get a signed contract and they will bump your traffic on top of the rest of the peasants.
Given the state of the US telecom market (obsolete infrastructure, lackluster innovation, record profits) do you think that the extra money they get from you will go towards infrastructure or fat pockets?
"Create the sickness, sell the cure" is the business model I see being most profitable in this scenario. The contract you negotiate will be to avoid throttling, not to access speeds that would be unavailable in a parallel universe with net neutrality. Choice != control when someone else writes the rules.
But you are right, an internet without net-neutrality sucks balls.