Similar to my comment above, there is a difference in having programs that follow closely with communist ideals and having a government or state that labels itself as communist.
I don't have stats for Switzerland handy but did look up Australia earlier. About 4% falls into there state-managed housing programs. That isn't nearly large enough to rival what the Soviet Union had for example, but the design of the system does seem to match with many communist goals. That is by no means a claim that Australia is communist, just a comment on their public housing program.
The other comment mentioned Austria system of public housing, not Australia's.
I believe you are misguided using the term communism or socialism, those have very specific meaning for an economic system, the overlapping characteristic being that workers own the means of production. That's it, socialised healthcare, public housing and so on are not communist/socialist.
Perhaps you are conflating social democracy with socialism/communism. The Nordics are not socialist/communist, like at all, Sweden has a freer market than the USA, and more wealth inequality, but do have social policies.
Your misuse of the terms is very confusing, I really suggest you brushing on what they mean so your communication is clearer. I got very confused at first on what you meant because there's no way any Western country is even close to Communism/Socialism/Marxism, like 100% not.
I don't have stats for Switzerland handy but did look up Australia earlier. About 4% falls into there state-managed housing programs. That isn't nearly large enough to rival what the Soviet Union had for example, but the design of the system does seem to match with many communist goals. That is by no means a claim that Australia is communist, just a comment on their public housing program.