Conclusion

Very early on in the 2008 financial crisis, while Americans were still reeling from an unprecedented economic disaster, a decision was quickly made that the massive debts and losses of reckless banks and investors were to be paid for by the American public, while the debts and losses of average Americans—homeowners, pension fund beneficiaries, those who lost their jobs and those whose prospects were permanently diminished—were to be shouldered by those same individuals. Many would argue that such an arrangement was unfair, but decisions as to who bears the costs of a crisis—whether it’s a financial crash, or a hurricane—are often made as the crisis is unfolding, while those with the fewest resources and access to power are struggling to process what just happened. The result is rarely good for the 99%.

Here in New York, as our communities struggle to come to terms with the mass destruction, suffering and loss of life left behind by Hurricane Sandy, decisions are already being made as to who will bear the costs. Now that these costs have become clear, the question remains: Will they be borne by a billionaire mayor and his close friends in the real estate industry who rezoned and developed the coastline at an unprecedented pace, even as the Army Corps of Engineers ranked New York at the top of the list of cities most vulnerable to a storm surge? Will the federal government that refused to make the necessary infrastructure investments to protect us pick up the tab? Will the private insurers who accepted premiums year after year step up to pay for the damage they led us to believe they would cover? Or will those costs be borne by the fossil fuel companies and their lobbyists who have done everything in their power to make sure that radical changes to our atmosphere continue at a rapid pace, making all of us more vulnerable to natural disaster?

As usual, it seems likely that the costs will be borne by the unfortunate individuals who found themselves in the path of a disaster that’s been years in the making—in this case the city’s residents. Rather than being offered the aid needed to restore their homes, those whose houses were destroyed are being pushed by FEMA to take on debts that will surely haunt them for the rest of their lives. Renters receive even less support in a system built to favor those who can take on debt. Residents of low-income housing, many of whom have been dealing with poor maintenance and deteriorating infrastructure in their buildings for years due to decreased federal spending and a revenue-strapped housing authority have needlessly suffered further due to federal and city loan-based relief efforts that don’t address their needs.

Debt is not aid. It would be cruel to offer a drowning person a 50 lb. dumbbell. Asking a person or family that has just lost everything to now take on $50,000 of debt and a lifetime of interest payments is not significantly more generous or helpful. Federal, state and city governments must do better.