said by KrK:
Only because of the lack of competition, and the resulting profit "opportunities."
Since you didn't quote what I said that you were responding to, I'm assuming it is the part about internet video pushing rates higher or caps lower...
If that is the case, no, you are wrong. It does simply cost more to deliver independent streams of video than it does using a broadcast method like satellite or cable. It isn't "only because of lack of competition" and other totally money hungry purposes. Yes, those do sometimes play a roll, but that isn't the main reason that replacing your TV delivery with the internet will cause your ISP to raise rates.
If a TV provider offers 100 channels, it can simply push those 100 channels out through the wire and every house can receive them. Other than the cost of the physical wire or receivers (and obvious things like support), it costs virtually the same to deliver those channels to 100 households as it does for 1000 homes.
Now internet streaming on the other hand would cost over 10 times as much to push 1000 streams vs 100. As I said, it is a horribly inefficient deliver method compared to the technologies that are built for it. You can think of it like a city bus vs individual cars. If you put a 100 cars on the road, you'll have a lot more traffic problems than if those 100 people all hop onto one bus.