The problem with today's housing crisis, politically, is that it is just not all that visible. At the end of the Second World War, families with kids【C1】______into shared houses. In 1946, more than 46,000 families took over military camps, empty hotels and flats. That was a(n) 【C2】______housing crisis. Today's does not come【C3】______: most people still have somewhere to live. It is nonetheless【C4】______, and worthy of political attention. But the question of exactly why our expensive homes【C5】______a crisis is more subtly depicted than it can appear. Since 1973 at least, the total number of "dwellings" has climbed far faster than the population. How is this possible,【C6】______that building rates have【C7】______? And doesn't it mean that there isn't really a housing crisis? First, in the 1960s and 1970s, while councils happily knocked【C8】______new estates, they were also busy pulling down lots of old "【C9】______" houses too. Social housing helped people move from broken old crowded houses into【C10】______new flats or houses, typically with much more【C11】______. Meanwhile, new homes were built on green fields. Average household sizes【C12】______dramatically, even as the average house got bigger. Though the housing stock【C13】______by less than the rate of building,【C14】______got a lot more space in which to live. In recent decades,【C15】______, everyone has got a lot less space. We have had【C16】______little new building, but【C17】______we have magically created lots of new housing. Essentially, so far, the housing crisis has been【C18】______by subdividing our homes to【C19】______the extra population growth.【C20】______, what new homes we do build are the smallest in the developed world.