Others believe that we should give away to the needy anything above what we need to survive. In his essay, The Singer Solution to World Poverty, Peter Singer states that we should donate everything that is not a necessity. Singer says that in America a family that earns $50,000 per year spends about $30,000 in essentials and that the remaining $20,000 should be given to the poor and not used for luxuries. This amount is extreme Singer is not just saying give what you can; he tells us that we are not to use our money for any luxuries. He even tries to make his audience feel guilty if they don’t abide by his formula. Singer tries to make people who don’t donate generously feel responsible for children who are dying around the world. If having to choose between Hardin’s self-survival and posterity or Singers demand that we live without luxuries so that we can give generously. I’m somewhere in the middle because I like a little of both. I agree with Hardin that we should all help preserve our natural resources for posterity, but I don’t agree that we should refrain from sharing or giving to those in need. I also agree with Singer that we should help children who are experiencing hunger or dying preventable deaths, but I don’t agree with donating everything above our bare necessities. Also, I don’t agree with Singer’s way of trying to make his audience feel guilty or responsible for the children’s
Others believe that we should give away to the needy anything above what we need to survive. In his essay, The Singer Solution to World Poverty, Peter Singer states that we should donate everything that is not a necessity. Singer says that in America a family that earns $50,000 per year spends about $30,000 in essentials and that the remaining $20,000 should be given to the poor and not used for luxuries. This amount is extreme Singer is not just saying give what you can; he tells us that we are not to use our money for any luxuries. He even tries to make his audience feel guilty if they don’t abide by his formula. Singer tries to make people who don’t donate generously feel responsible for children who are dying around the world. If having to choose between Hardin’s self-survival and posterity or Singers demand that we live without luxuries so that we can give generously. I’m somewhere in the middle because I like a little of both. I agree with Hardin that we should all help preserve our natural resources for posterity, but I don’t agree that we should refrain from sharing or giving to those in need. I also agree with Singer that we should help children who are experiencing hunger or dying preventable deaths, but I don’t agree with donating everything above our bare necessities. Also, I don’t agree with Singer’s way of trying to make his audience feel guilty or responsible for the children’s