Starlink is giving me over 150 up and 20 down during peak hours in a waitlist / oversubscribed area with a previous generation modem. They more than meet the new definition for broadband.
However, it doesn't scale nearly as well as just running fiber to the home, either in number of subscribers, or in per-home cost.
Some relatives live in an area with a phone co-op, and they ran trenchless underground fiber to each home in their service area. Population density is something like 1.2 people per square mile, and median income is ~ $20K. Monthly rates are extremely low. I watched the installers. It was two people and they were covering a good fraction of a mile per day. Equipment and material costs are negligible. There are communities in the SF bay area that are outside of telco monopoly territory. Trenching fiber here (in the mountains) runs something like $10K/house, which is $27/month when you amortize the cost out over 30 years.
The equity / subsidy programs I've seen are always just handouts for large ISPs that have established monopolies and that refuse to reinvest even a small fraction of their monthly revenue into network upgrades.
Establishing municipal broadband or broadband co-ops and giving them automatic right-of-way priority over the incumbents would fix this problem overnight. Either there would be a second fiber network that didn't suck, or the incumbents would actually invest in their networks.