- refinancing on low interest
- significant leveraged appreciation of housing pricing because of fiscal policies
Not really, given that something is apparently different about this world such that the existence of roadlords represents a stable equilibrium.
The situation is different for highways, bridges, and tunnels of course, but we already have pay-per-use for some of those, and it seems to work okay.
Not saying roads should all be private, but I see this argument sometimes, and it misses the reality of the incentive structure of the owners of private roads.
What's more interesting is if you take that extreme and flip it back to housing.
Imagine a world where:
You are banned from owning land or housing. There's a variety of options to live in, but limited by what the government decides is fitting. Then, a popular movement within government decides that a particular type of housing is not appropriate for society, and starts destroying all of those houses. Instead, they decree, the best and only type of housing that should be available are communes where everyone gets a bed but zero privacy. You're not allowed your own four walls, you have to share space with everyone.
It's so much more efficient! they decree.
Well, that's exactly what is starting to happen to roads in some major cities. Parking spaces are being removed in favor of expanding public transportation. Entire blocks are being declared off-limits to private cars to make them "walkable".
I'm not really advocating one way or the other here- my point is that it's kindof silly to compare roads and housing at such extremes, because the benefits and consequences of various polices are not directly analogous to each other.
Landlords are a necessary part of a functioning society.