The 'no roads scheme' is a fear scheme based on the idea that without the governments people would not have roads. They just would sit in their houses which they bought from a homebuilder who put these houses in the middle of nowhere, without a way to get there. People usually do not ask how such a strange situation would be able to come about. How would these people move their stuff into the house without roads or why they would not ask a question to the project developer like :"we really like your house and the landscaping and car port, but how are we supposed to get the car in the car port and the furniture in the living room?" or "How did you manage to build that house without roads, did you fly in everything with a helicopter?"

This is not a good scheme to start with if you start your exploitation scheme from scratch, because it seems so ridiculous, but if you have taken exclusive control of roads and manage to hold onto it for a while, the tax cattle can no longer imagine how, without someone pointing a gun at someone else, any piece of asfalt can be dumped on a layer of sand. Even if they experience clean, efficient private roads inside supermarkets in between shops, they cling on to the traffic jam ridden life eaters of public roads.

It gets even better, as another intervention shortage develops on the transportation capacity of public roads (you have to prevent others from competing), this can be used to demand more money from the tax cattle. Squeeze Squander and Spin advises never to actually spend this new money on roads, because that would solve the problem and take away the excuse for more money in the future. It is better to give it to companies that break up the roads and then leave it blocked for a year or so. You claim shortage of funds and more money keeps getting in as long as the cattle likes to move from A to B.