No. He suggested that it was a legacy of feudalism.
The earliest 'social housing' wasn't really social housing in the modern sense, because there wasn't a state in the modern sense. It was simply a form of charity, something which Christian kings were expected to engage in (similar to the alms given to the poor on coronations etc) for the salvation of their souls.
Also, England was not feudal in Athelstan's reign. So, even if that was related to 'social housing' as we know it, then it would have to be said to predate feudalism in England.
[eta] actually, he described a feudal relationship with the state in European cultures, which is a slightly different kettle of fish, my bad.
Having read back through his post I was struck by this:
Quote:
|
The issue at hand, health care, seems somewhat different..
|
Why?
People's health depends on a number of different factors. Overcrowded, inadequate housing leads to a range of health problems and increases the likelihood and seriousness of epidemics. Slums and overcrowded tenements are a breeding ground for TB and cholera.
Social housing isn't free, it is subsidized. Or it used to be anyway. Most people living in 'social housing' aren't unemployed, they're workers. The idea is a simple one: the local authority would build low cost housing with subsidies from the government (thereby boosting the building trade along the way) and workers would then pay rent to the authority at a fair and affordable level. Because private landlords were unwilling, or unable to provide sufficient accommodation of a reasonable quality to house the workforce where it needed to be housed.
The need for this intervention was clear: large numbers of the working classes were housed in crowded slums and tenements, which is why epidemic disease occasionally ravaged the working class population. That was bad for the whole country not just the individuals concerned. As was the dearth of fit and able soldiers who met the necessary standards for military service: again, partly to do with the housing, and partly to do with other elements of extreme poverty such as malnutrition and injury/disablement through unregulated factory practices
and a lack of access to basic medical care
It's all part of the picture. You can give healthcare to all at the point of need and it will resolve some problems. But if the people accessing that care live in one of the many cardboard cities springing up around America right now, don't expect them to be 'healthy'.