2)"ISPs should be able to charge more to high-bandwidth users" - they can, and do (I regularly pay more if my data usage goes over a certain cap). Moreover, nothing about NN limits how much you are charged for the quantity of data you consume. It just says that ISPs cannot treat the data differently based on the TYPE of data - that is, they can't intentionally slow down Netflix videos while letting Amazon Prime videos go through at full speed, nor can they charge you more for 1G of email than they do for 1G of music.
3)"We've only had NN for a couple years, it hasn't benefited me at all" - Actually, we've had neutrality, or near neutrality, pretty much since the beginning of the internet. It was only made a regulation a few years ago when it became obvious that without it, ISPs were starting to abuse the lack of regulation.
4)"We didn't have any problems when NN wasn't the law" - actually, we did. AT&T, which wanted to push it's own DirectTV video service over competitors, didn't count DirectTV against a user's data cap, while other streaming video DID count. Verizon has done similar things. Comcast used to slow down all traffic for users of BitTorrent, a popular file-sharing app. Verizon has admitted to throttling many types of video. And it's clear that all of the ISPs are gearing up to take full advantage of the new lack of neutrality when it goes into effect.
Net Neutrality basically says "If I'm paying you for 1GB of data, it's none of your business what that data is - you have no right look at it and then (based on what it is) block it, slow it down, or extort money from any other internet company to ensure it gets to me".