Your arguments may seem sound to you but they lack a major understanding of how advertising works to begin with, so all your empirical thought construction is biased as a result.
I have nothing against advertising if it stays discreet enough, and American standards in that area are definitely NOT discreet. My beef is tracking, and that's why I'm blocking all ads altogether, discreet or not.
That said, I wouldn't want my way to become predominant, because advertising *is* necessary in many cases, and in a couple cases it would arguably cease to be necessary only if it was forbidden by law. (which would be unreasonable)
Thirdly, Pointless advertising Things that everyone needs that never needs to be advertised. Like toilet paper, soap, water... This are things that will always be purchased with or without advertising. If the companies stopped advertising they wouldn't go out of business quite the opposite would happen there products would be cheaper and people would buy more of them.
This is such a case. Such items currently need advertising because when your competitors pay tons for ads and you do nothing, and the market is saturated like it is for such products, then you just run out of business. It's the same principle as the competition for access to Sun light in a forest.
Back to replying to your other points:
1/ Sure enough, advertising costs is money that counts in a budget. However it can be calculated and actually end up being a monetary GAIN for the consumers, because what the company pays for advertising can be translated into how much money it gets back. When the balance is positive (and really, that's the whole point of advertising), the company has extra cash. One of the things you can do with extra cash is lower your prices.
2/ Your whole point assumes that the user base will be identical or even bigger if all advertising ceases. Decades of evidence have proven otherwise though. Without advertising, user base depletes simply because so much less people get to know your product. If you start a business you will have huge problems getting discovered. If the market is saturated your competitors who do advertise will suffocate you. There are only a handful of cases where you can go by without advertising, and those cases don't last forever.
3/ See quote at the top of the post
The websites that depend on ad revenue should die honestly. this means that they have no meaningful way of generating there own income.
Oh man that is so ignorant and dangerous. If you had any power to act on your "should die" statement, you would be such a nuisance. There are oh so many things that can't directly generate income yet are so precious to society as a whole, or even just to single individuals. I'm sure you can think of good stuff yourself. You don't want to kill these things.
5/ It's true that aggressive advertising is a real pain in the ass. American standards are horrible, there is way too much shit in your face disfiguring the landscape and the web. In the physical world this shit should be regulated by law and if it is already, it should be made stricter (however now that companies rely on this level of advertising, changing regulation can create harmful chaos. But if it's done progressively and thought out carefully as any law should be, I'm all for it). In the digital space there probably should be no such laws because applying laws require control over the web, which is something way way WAY worse than excessive advertising, especially when you have adblockers.
Anyway, there's still room for webmasters to place their ads with taste and decency. But it is true that being more aggressive brings more money in the short term, and many web markets ARE saturated. Most businesses don't want to rely on advertising to cover their costs, because that's a sign of fragility, so they struggle to find other business models. They ideally just want to use advertising to grow or fuel their userbase faster than they lose consumers.
Finally malware and dubious ads are errors made by ad networks rather than webmasters, but you can indeed tell the "worth" of a webmaster by the general kind of ads that his site allows. Basically if he's too aggressive, he is worth less. However he has his own problems to solve that the jungle market kindly brought to him. Only a minority is cynically milking the cow until it dies.
6/ Free to play is an interesting and rising business model, but it can be abused way more seriously than just regular web ads. When the free to play model is abused you are not playing games anymore, you are using a product entirely designed around the concept of cynically milking the cow till it speaks its last moo. Dungeon Keeper mobile sounds like a good example of cow molesting.
But there are many good free to play games so let's not make me say what I didn't, I'm totally against the trend that shits on that business model as a whole and all games based on it.