Red wrote:

The blame for all Sandy's damage is already being placed on climate
change by the media.

I haven't heard that and I've been watching for it. Perfect
opportunity for the tree huggers to gloat, "See, told you..."

Could the late season storm be caused by climate change? Possibly.

Don't think so. Most of those 10 jillion scientists who froth at the
mouth about our profligate energy waste seem to espouse the idea that
the big storms are simply natural cycle and are unrelated to climate
change. The temperature increase that feeds the hurricanes is so
slight as to be unnoticeable (yet) and the increase in sea level (up
to now) is trivial.

But the vast majority of blame should be rightly placed on:
Developers who sell waterfront housing on the beach knowing the risks.
Developers building non-hurricane approved housing.

I thought hurricane approved housing, much like earthquake approved
focused on keeping the outer shell of the building intact. Basically a
wind problem for hurricanes. But for Sandy although wind affected
trees and hence electricity supply, most of the damage was storm
surge.

The key here is indeed greedy developers but probably equally us and
our elected officials. I thought we'd stopped allowing building of
anything more than beach shacks on barrier islands but that's where
lots of the damage occurred in NJ. You don't get sand dunes washing
into your front yard if you don't build on the beach.

Even government sponsored construction appeared on landfill (Battery
Park City (on the tip of Manhattan) and quasi-barrier islands such as
Coney Island (not really an island now and has many large public
housing projects). You could even consider much of Long Island as
barrier island, at least the low-lying areas (lots of it).

Very hard to resist the temptation to build in those areas and
probably the kiss of death for any politician who tried in the past or
who tries now. But that's exactly the sort of bitter medicine we have
to take if we don't want these problems to recur.

Home owners buying homes on the beach knowing the risks.
Developers building structures of all types at sea level.
The city building underground transportation below water levels.

Note the word "underground". Very difficult to build that type of
transportation system above water levels especially when it has to go
under two major rivers. The solution is actually twofold: large
watertight doors and large capacity pumps. But the problem is still
our unwillingness to be taxed to afford them and the benefit (or lack
thereof) that would accrue to any politician who succeeded in forcing
us to cough up the money.

The jamming up of population into a small area where evacuation is
nearly impossible.

Evacuation is/was not the problem.

And the list goes on....

I say that the risk takers finally lost their bet rather just a
climate problem.
And the risk takers are pleading for money to recoop their loses.
And all of us are going to have to pay it one way or the other.

Just as we're all paying for Joplin, New Orleans, etc. and will
continue to do so for others unless of course you want to consider
secession.