Monday, April 7, 2014
Assistance after Sandy
Hey it's Fatima and I will be writing about New York City's response to Hurricane Sandy. I believe that New York City's response to Sandy was inadequate by not providing assistance to the victims that lost their homes along the coast and trying to push for more profitable high rises. I will be referencing a passage from Blanking the beach by Naomi Kline to support my claim. According to Kline, the government in Sri Lanka used the tsunami as the driving force to "clear the beach of fishing people" that subsequently "did not contribute to economic growth" that a coast of swanky new hotels would (Klein 67). In both New York City and Sri Lanka there was a sense of "governmental abandonment" leaving the victims of the storm and tsunami without support or help with rebuilding their homes. When Sandy struck the coast the and wiped out numerous homes, the city didn't really offer any help for the victims. They didn't help the victims with insurance assistance to help rebuild their homes because they know without it, it would be almost impossible for most to rebuild and they would leave the coast, which would be convenient for New York City. New York city would have a clean slate to profit off of. The coast is profitable for the city, and they could use the coast to build high rises with very expensive rents that the citizens that originally lived there cannot afford. As for governmental abandonment in New York City I am talking about as displacement. They did indeed offer assistance but it was very minimal. They put victims in shelters but how many victims are still in shelters still waiting for assistance from the city. I feel they were abandoned, let in shelters with no further help to get our their situation just like what the government in Sri Lanka did to the fishermen.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Well done.
ReplyDeleteAmazing! What an absolute pleasure reading your description of New York City's "unpreparedness" after encountering hurricane Sandy. What is most gratifying about your reading is how intelligently you connect the idea of "clean slate" from Sri Lanka to New York City. However, even though it is absolutely clear that the government in your response favor "blank slate" for profits, my question is how will the city make money? In Sri Lanka private enterprises constructed luxurious hotels, will profits be made in the same method here in New York City? If you would please allow me to challenge your statement relating to "government abandonment"(Smith). To my belief, although New York City refused to provide public assistance after a "certain time period." New York did provide shelters to victims, unlike Sri lanka. Again this is just constructive criticism, and feel extremely lucky upon reading your sophisticated opinion.
ReplyDeleteFrom yours truly Ruben Aponte.
Thanks Ruben. As far as how the city would make money by referencing Sri Lanka is the homes and properties that were wiped out by Sandy didn't receive much assistance in rebuilding because the coast is profitable for the city. The city could use the coast to build high rises with very expensive rents that the citizens that originally lived there cannot afford. As for governmental abandonment in New York City I am talking about as displacement. They did indeed offer assistance but it was very minimal. They put victims in shelters but how many victims are still in shelters still waiting for assistance from the city. I feel they were abandoned, let in shelters with no further help to get our their situation. I want to thank you for your input, I should have put these arguing points in my entry.
Delete