Austria has highly available state housing of high quality. I don't think they qualify as a communist state, despite one of the more prominent complexes named after Karl Marx.
Unpopular opinion, but much of the west is at least partially communist these days. We may not have a communist political structure that looks like a 20th century dictatorship claiming communism but we do have plenty of state-run programs that fit really well under a banner of communism (or socialism, or Marxism if the term communism is too loaded).
Boeing is another good example in my opinion. Again they aren't technically owned by the state, but the connection between the two is undeniable.
Utility companies in the US are also functionally owned by the state.
My point was never that most western countries are communist. I tried to be really clear in my GP comment that I was talking specifically about state programs that have many characteristics that overlap with communism.
edit to add the obvious one I missed: healthcare. Depending on the country, either the government took over the healthcare industry, the industry captured government regulation, or you have the worst of both worlds in the US where we somehow saw both sides take part in capturing parts of the other (and really ruining the whole system).
I expanded more on my other reply so I will diverge us to discuss there, I think you misunderstand the terms you are using.
Even at the state level, Louisiana is an interesting case. They're better now, but for quite a few years their roads went to shit because they refused to increase the legal drinking age and the federal government pulled funding.
I really doubt someone would call Switzerland communist.
I don't have stats for Switzerland handy but did look up Australia earlier. About 4% falls into there state-managed housing programs. That isn't nearly large enough to rival what the Soviet Union had for example, but the design of the system does seem to match with many communist goals. That is by no means a claim that Australia is communist, just a comment on their public housing program.
I believe you are misguided using the term communism or socialism, those have very specific meaning for an economic system, the overlapping characteristic being that workers own the means of production. That's it, socialised healthcare, public housing and so on are not communist/socialist.
Perhaps you are conflating social democracy with socialism/communism. The Nordics are not socialist/communist, like at all, Sweden has a freer market than the USA, and more wealth inequality, but do have social policies.
Your misuse of the terms is very confusing, I really suggest you brushing on what they mean so your communication is clearer. I got very confused at first on what you meant because there's no way any Western country is even close to Communism/Socialism/Marxism, like 100% not.