Every day people in America are buying new and expensive things, whether it is a new car, a flat screen television or that $7,000 engagement ring for their sweetheart. In Singer’s article “The Singer Solution to World Poverty,” Singer suggests an eradicable solution, that “prosperous people should donate to overseas aid organizations” to help the needy in other countries that cannot afford even the simplest necessities instead of purchasing those “luxuries.” There are several pros and cons that float around Singer’s argument, the negatives however seem to out rule the positive thinking in Singer’s case.
Singer urges that Americans should donate every last penny they earn if it is not going toward necessities, people may find this ludicrous, or people may find it to be a plausible solution to end poverty around the world. I on the other hand agree with the people who work every day of their life to support their own family, not with the people who think it is so simple to just stick out their hand and expect to get money graciously given to them. The American people are hardworking and do not deserve to be guilted into giving charity. So many times on television the American people view commercials that beg for them to provide places in Africa and other countries with money so that they can afford schooling or a substantial meal every day. What those commercials show are the places in Africa that unfortunately do not have a steady form of currency, but in truth there are many whereabouts in Africa that in fact have a more stable economy then cities in America. This leads me to refute Singer’s “simple” solution, why is he proposing this idea to Americans who are currently in a recession, when in reality these countries should help themselves. America is a very generous country; funds are given by our government to help other populations constantly, Singer has no right to pressure citizens of the U.S to “donate” out of pocket to these other countries.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document