We'll stick with the same three from the causes page:

• Poverty--We'll talk here about those adversely (negatively) affected. Obviously, those with low incomes; those with less opportunity for a decent education (when school funding is based on property tax revenue, those in neighborhoods with low property values will have poorly funded schools and attract teachers with fewer other options, who will themselves have less resources to work with); Non-white groups are disproportionately poor, as are women (imagine then prospects for black women); Some authors will blame it on 'bad choices' (this from Juan Williams, Fox News contributor), others will say for instance that blacks are genetically inferior (the 'bell curve' thesis), which they use to argue for less government support of social welfare programs; Children are often the group that suffers most in poverty. Poverty can mean lower education attainment, worse health, higher infant mortality, lower life expectancy, etc. But don't think there aren't groups who don't benefit from poverty, either ....
• Divorce--Consequences of divorce include greater risk of poverty for all ages, including those retiring (why?), children, disproportionately women, etc. This puts a greater strain on public welfare programs, funded by tax revenue. But do welfare programs address higher divorce rates? Here's a 'conservative' view, and a 'progressive' view.
• Banking crisis--Obviously, those already poor will be hit first and hardest; those who have their mortgages foreclosed may be scrambling for housing; the economic downturn will increase unemployment; If banks aren't willing to lend, that will affect the economy and production; those with credit burdens they can't pay off may have to file for bankruptcy; all of these things will affect local economies, where businesses depend on people to spend money so that they can hire and pay their workers; less income means less consumption, means less goods produced, means less workers needed--see how this quickly spirals into a larger economic problem? The economic stresses may lead to other sorts of social and cultural stresses, in society, in the household, in communities, etc. Those who had invested heavily in banks may see their fortunes turn sour, but that depends on how the government decides to manage the 'bailout.' People making a living trading stocks, as financial managers, may see their incomes drop. And lots of people with money invested in retirement pensions may see the value of those pensions decline sharply, especially if they were heavily invested in real estate. The construction industry, and those who supply the construction industry (from sawmills to hardware stores) may be adversely affected . . . And here's a concept for you. We can't just talk about the effects and distribution of harm on current populations. When it comes to something involving debt, or unsustainable resource use, or pollution, for instance, we have to consider the effects on future generations. How you gonna get this in your 3-minute TV news segment?

As you think about consequences, think about which groups are most likely hurt by them. We're interested in understanding structural forces here, so understanding that certain groups will be more likely affected than others is a good start. Remember our discussion of the building and structure. Regardless of which individuals are poor at any given time, we can make some basic predictions about how the banking crisis might affect them as a group.