No, those consumers who judge that that level of service is a better deal for them would switch.
To step back a bit, what I posited was only a hypothetical to show how such a choice might limit competition down the line.
To step back even further, your post makes it clear that we have an ideological difference here. I do not view rate-limiting as inherently bad. There is a ceiling above which I would not be willing to pay for a completely unthrottled connection. There also exists a price at which I would be happy to take a throttled connection.
My general preference would be for an unthrottled connection, but my preferences do not exist in a vacuum. The price difference where I would choose the throttled connection would have to be quite large, and the throttled vs unthrottled rates would also come into play.
Further, some of my favorite websites would not be much affected at all. This site, for example places a miniscule load on my connection and minimal data transfer in a month.
I don't generally frequent multimedia sites. I utilize an RSS reader for blogs, so that bandwidth is also fairly minimal (especially if I choose to omit images). Email is text for the most part. A website could compete very well with minimal bandwidth for any of these purposes.
Furthermore, you assume that the bandwidth would be throttled always, and I've gone along with that. There are other rate-limiting strategies that might be chosen. One might be a data transfer cap, beyond which the bandwidth is throttled. Another might be peak-hour throttling, in which case my late-night browsing would be unaffected (and I do a lot of that).
One plan that would be pretty tempting for me is unlimited Netflix and Pandora with a reasonable data cap (I haven't tracked my monthly transfer rates lately so couldn't say what would be reasonable here).
Further, I've not suggested that this be the only plan available. I merely suggested it (hypothetically) as a manner in which a new entrant might gain enough market share to establish itself as a player. The more ISPs there are, the more likely one is to offer service you like. The more you restrict the terms an ISP may offer, the harder it is for them to compete.
I hope this thought process helps clear up where I am coming from.
Finally, I ask whether you consider toll roads immoral, or whether you hold your cable (television) provider responsible for the (production/acting) quality of the television shows you watch, or if you want to stick up for HBO and how downtrodden it is by NBC? The provider of the means of access has no moral imperative to provide equal access to all content.