[originaltext] It may be true, and we have to recognize obviously, that the

It may be true, and we have to recognize obviously, that the population is badly housed and that we need more housing. However, housing uses up our scarce resources. It is pretty meaningless, therefore, to talk about providing more housing without taking into account the alternative use of resources. To provide more housing, when you have scarce resources, also implies, perhaps, making a choice between housing and other things which we could provide. Now, therefore, it’s a question of priority. This is the problem which is true in U.K. market and it’s also true in any housing market. The decision to provide more housing would involve giving up something. The question, therefore, arises. To what extent is the housing the greater priority than, say, health care and education. So we come to a problem about choice. How are choices to be made in any economy, concerning how much housing is going to be provided?
    Indeed, how are the choices going to be made in any economy about anything which is provided? And who is going to make that choice? Basically, choices about how resources are allocated in any economy boil down to two possible ways of solving the problem. You either have the choices made directly by the government, or the choices are made indirectly through the market.