Err, No.

This isn\’t in fact, a sensible idea.

How do we weaken the link between socioeconomic status and health? One option, according to sociologists, is to build social housing in affluent areas.

Because we have other sociologists insisting that it is relative socioeconomic status that matters. And it\’s relative, not to some global or even national standard, but to one\’s peer group. Now, it does depend upon which effect is greater, but there\’s the possibility that by building the social housing where such relative differences are in fact highlighted, we\’ll be increasing the gap in health outcomes.

4 thoughts on “Err, No.”

  1. It worked sooo well with the Roundshaw estate in affluent Wallington, no? (Roundshaw was used in the early days of The Bill to represent, erm, a sink estate)

  2. Tim, tim, tim.

    Come along: you are missing the point of the exercise. By building social housing in affluent areas, you will REDUCE THE AFFLUENCE OF THE AREA!

    The idea is not bring the level of the unfortunates UP, it’s to bring the level of the rest DOWN.


  3. See it’s like that gag about Air Force technicians, goes like this:

    Pilot report: Evidence of fuel leak in right engine.

    Technician response: Evidence removed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *