TECHNOBUREAUCRACY ANO CITY LIFE Rex and Moore distinguished seven « housing classes » as follows: 1. The outright owner of large houses in desirable areas 2. Mortgage payers who « own » whole house in desirable areas 3. Council tenants in Council-built houses 4. Council tenants in slum housing awaiting demolition 5. Tenants of private house-owners, usually in the inner ring 6. House owner who must take lodgers to meet loan repayments 7. Lodgers in rooms This ranking has been criticized on several grounds. lt assumes that there is a unitary status-value system shared by all sections of society. In other words, it assumes that everybody wants to be an owner occupier in a fashionable area. This « unitary status-value system » is indeed encouraged by the institutions which control access to housing, but various writers have shown that there are people who choose to live in the transitional areas for cultura! and other reasons. Another criticism is that Rex and Moore have confused categories of the population with types of housing. This criticism by Haddon was added to by Pahl who « ••. argues that "the present housing conditions need not necessarily be any guide to an indicator of 'class' conflict", and that conflict could only be said to exist "if a category is condemmed to remain in such a housing situation because there are no alternatives open to it... and that this blockage is not primarily due to that category's position in the productive process". In positing that "conflict will not be directed against those in another housing situation but rather on the means and criteria of access and those who determine and control them" he reformulated the housing classes model into an access model, the crucial differentiating factor being capi tal » (33). Pahl's model contains the following categories: 1. Large property owner and capitalist speculators 2. Smaller landlords 3.a Owners of capita! sufficient to own their own houses and owning (33) D.C. MC CULLOCH, op. cit., p. 26. 33
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTExMDY2NQ==