Cong  Corrales “It is always about money.” -Jessica Pearson, Suits (Season 1)   IT has been said that calamities and disasters bring out the best and the worst in people. As a “Sendong” survivor, I have personally witnessed this to be true. When Sendong struck the city, I witnessed an ambulant vendor hand out his puto for free to our neighbors in Consolacion. It struck a chord in me because I knew how much that vendor gave up in terms of his start-up capital. I know this because my ex-girlfriend and I used to operate a small sari-sari store when we were just starting as a couple years back. However, disasters also bring out the opportunistic character of people. I was watching “Suits” (a TV series about corporate lawyers) last week when I was reminded of this reality: When pushed to a corner to choose between the future of her firm and a dirt-poor pro bono client, Jessica Pearson (one of the characters) shot back at her associate: “It is always about money.” There is nothing altruistic about contracts, agreements, and loans. Call me naïve but I was actually excited when the Pagibig Fund released an advisory to its members that they were handing out “calamity” loans a day after the flooding of major parts of the city recently. The government-owned and -controlled finance corporation even had a nice come-on. They offered up to 80 percent of a member’s total accumulated value for calamity loan applications. A member’s total accumulated value comprises their personal share to the Fund, the employer’s counterpart – which is half of what a member gives the fund, and their earned dividends. The Fund also promised that their calamity loan and multipurpose loan programs are treated as “separate and distinct from each other.” “Hence, the members shall be allowed to avail of a calamity loan while he still has an outstanding multipurpose loan and vice versa.” The gender challenged stipulation in their loan application notwithstanding, the stipulation is pretty clear on who is allowed to avail of the calamity loan. After all, the Fund is the members’ contribution. They even stipulated at the back of the calamity loan application: “For borrowers with existing multipurpose loan at the time of availment [sic] of a calamity loan, the outstanding loan balance of the multipurpose loan shall not be deducted from the proceeds of the calamity loan.” (E.2.) Are the stipulations in the calamity loan too good to be true? I say yes because it is not true. In reality, this is how the Fund computes on how much a member can avail from their “calamity loan”: net amount due = principal balance + penalties + accrued interest – rebate. A neighbor applied for the Fund’s calamity loan program a week ago. She found out the “calamity loan” she could get his hands on was 80 percent of what reflected as “rebate” in the equation above – which amounted to a measly P1,977.38. Consolacion was not flooded earlier this year but our neighbor wanted to repair the walls of their house since these were soaked and became dangerously unstable since the 12-hour rain that flooded most parts of the city. So she pleaded the Fund’s desk clerk not to deduct her outstanding loan with the Fund so she could get a larger sum – enough to repair her house. She told me the clerk told her they could but that she would have to pay for a larger amount since they will deduct the amount anyway. My neighbor’s experience had me computing on my contribution and outstanding loan with the Fund. After calculating, I have decided not to avail of Pagibig Fund’s “calamitous loan.” What the hell am I going to do with P900? Pfft.