Let me try this the way Jules might explain it to Vincent Vega.
You see, there's this thing called "Television", and they show programs on it that people like. They like different things, of course, so the things you don't like may not be a barometer of popularity or even worthwhile-ness across a wider market demographic.
I'm happy for you that this won't affect you. If only you represented even a reasonable-sized sample of the market in the US.
At any rate, here's how it affects Netflix (and I've typed this before, but I'll try again. Maybe this time it takes!) As content providers have their current contracts run out with Netflix, they either can choose to charge Netflix a highly ballooned rate for that content based on revenues lost from consumers who don't watch the shows on linear TV anymore...or they can yank the content altogether.
In the first scenario, Netflix pays an exponentially inflated price to continue showing the content it has in the past. They're not going to just eat that greatly inflated cost. Solution: Netflix does a rate hike. They've been amazingly about gradual rate hikes, mostly thanks to cash flow generated by new subscriber revenues. At some point, logic suggests that the limitations of broadband internet will peak the those new subscribers, though, and that, combined with increased content costs suggests that the price for Netflix will be going up and up.
In the second scenario, content providers like AMC, FX, NBCU (which is TNT), and Viacom yank their programming at the expiry of content contracts. Now Netflix can hold the line on pricing, but they're offering a less appealing product and as consumers we have to subscribe to more and more subscription or paywall services to get access to the content we're getting now.
I suspect that the real result will be a bit of both. Content prices will continue to rise and Netflix will eventually have to raise rates significantly while the content it offers continues to reduce.