My Money My Problem
Introduction
Poverty, according to United Nations, is a state where a person cannot afford to meet the basic needs. Most people live in dire poverty due to unwarranted circumstances, which have been studied by scholars to include misappropriation of government resources and poor authority. There are solutions across the field to mitigate the adverse effect of poverty in the world. One of the scholars to put forward an argument is peter singer. In his article, “Singer Solution to World Poverty,” he talks about how to overcome poverty through an initiative like giving to the poor people by the rich people and change the spending habits amongst the poor in the society. He targets the rich and poor in the same vein with the …show more content…
Also, the amount proposed is significant, for example giving out substantial amount of the income from someone hard earned cash.
Both versions of Singer dispute make for prickly reading, in that few live their lives by principle. Thus, many have challenged his position. He, on the other hand, anticipate objections, but there are still grounds to question the arguments further, either we accept Singer’s view of utilitarian view of morality, or we reason why we should reject the argument.
By accepting Singer view, the morality holds that activities are right in proportion since they tend to uphold happiness to those in need, and wrong since it produces the reverse of happiness (Mill, 1879). For example, if I have a choice of more than one action, then the right one is that results in a considerable increase in happiness to someone else. The singer is implying that the effect of one’s spending choices comparing with that of the people receiving the donation. Singer misses mentioning the side effect of the donor happiness. As a donor consumes money on luxurious things, some people benefit directly and indirectly from that. The money in the economy circulates more and too many people, as compared to giving directions to the
Introduction
Poverty, according to United Nations, is a state where a person cannot afford to meet the basic needs. Most people live in dire poverty due to unwarranted circumstances, which have been studied by scholars to include misappropriation of government resources and poor authority. There are solutions across the field to mitigate the adverse effect of poverty in the world. One of the scholars to put forward an argument is peter singer. In his article, “Singer Solution to World Poverty,” he talks about how to overcome poverty through an initiative like giving to the poor people by the rich people and change the spending habits amongst the poor in the society. He targets the rich and poor in the same vein with the …show more content…
Also, the amount proposed is significant, for example giving out substantial amount of the income from someone hard earned cash.
Both versions of Singer dispute make for prickly reading, in that few live their lives by principle. Thus, many have challenged his position. He, on the other hand, anticipate objections, but there are still grounds to question the arguments further, either we accept Singer’s view of utilitarian view of morality, or we reason why we should reject the argument.
By accepting Singer view, the morality holds that activities are right in proportion since they tend to uphold happiness to those in need, and wrong since it produces the reverse of happiness (Mill, 1879). For example, if I have a choice of more than one action, then the right one is that results in a considerable increase in happiness to someone else. The singer is implying that the effect of one’s spending choices comparing with that of the people receiving the donation. Singer misses mentioning the side effect of the donor happiness. As a donor consumes money on luxurious things, some people benefit directly and indirectly from that. The money in the economy circulates more and too many people, as compared to giving directions to the