In the two articles, “Famine, Affluence, And Morality” by Peter singer and “ World Hunger And Moral Obligation: The Case Against Singer” by John Arthur Talks generally about ethics, To be more specific, they talk about the self of need of what is the moral right thing to do and the duty of what is someone 's job as a human to do for others. Both have different arguments and to get straight to the point, Singer believe that the right moral thing to do is help others when you can regardless of the situation or distance you are from. We must take away more bad from the situation and leave more good. This does not mean everyone should have the same amount of good but as long as we take away the bad, we can all leave it fair for everyone with no
…show more content…
What I mean by this the fact how America do not seem to try to help the poor and middle class but just let the elites get richer. They say is fair how the economy is but the reality is starting with a million dollars is not the same as someone who never seen a million dollars. Not many elites in America contribute enough to help the poor from hunger, shelter and affording medicare. The idea of what Arthur is bringing of thinking about yourself first and you 're not obligated to help anyone because you 're entitled to your own self rights to choose. If the elites has enough money, they should pay more tax than someone who makes less than 50,000 dollars a year. The middle class could barely survive with minimum wage and the gap between rich and poor is making the middle class extinct. As a community we must rise together with no one left behind. Like Singer said not everyone should have all the good like everyone having a lamborghini, or everyone having the same food, or even same type of house. Instead let 's make sure our people do have these supplies and not suffering. The thought of America being a selfish country is not really hard to believe with the fact they barely contribute their money around the world. Ignorance is all over the world, and is not like we not aware of all the problem. People knows the problem but chooses to ignore them. They think is best to avoid in their favor of not sacrificing anything to help
What I mean by this the fact how America do not seem to try to help the poor and middle class but just let the elites get richer. They say is fair how the economy is but the reality is starting with a million dollars is not the same as someone who never seen a million dollars. Not many elites in America contribute enough to help the poor from hunger, shelter and affording medicare. The idea of what Arthur is bringing of thinking about yourself first and you 're not obligated to help anyone because you 're entitled to your own self rights to choose. If the elites has enough money, they should pay more tax than someone who makes less than 50,000 dollars a year. The middle class could barely survive with minimum wage and the gap between rich and poor is making the middle class extinct. As a community we must rise together with no one left behind. Like Singer said not everyone should have all the good like everyone having a lamborghini, or everyone having the same food, or even same type of house. Instead let 's make sure our people do have these supplies and not suffering. The thought of America being a selfish country is not really hard to believe with the fact they barely contribute their money around the world. Ignorance is all over the world, and is not like we not aware of all the problem. People knows the problem but chooses to ignore them. They think is best to avoid in their favor of not sacrificing anything to help