Workers could live within walking distance of their place of employment. That is the way it used to work
Companies could not survive without a way to distribute their goods and services
Companies usd to distribute their goods and services within the same area as the workers. Now with internet you dont really need roads and bridges.
The argument over who benefiits more is silly. Such things are labelled communal goods precisely because you cannot quantify who benefits more than someone else We all benefit, period.
What is your point?
The argument is that businesses, the evil rich, utilize public services and public roads--all of which occur in a vacuum in which they contribute nothing--benefit from them and thus should pay higher taxes instead of reinvesting it, increasing employees, paying larger Christmas bonuses, whatever the hell they choose to do with other than forcefully giving it to a wasteful, inept, and ever increasingly politicized federal government.
My point is that Nutsucker's point is irrelevant.
