In the essay Samaritan’s Dilemma, Robert Sirico claims that charity is not always helpful to society. He implies that some people take advantage of others kindness, in this case, soup kitchens.
To support his claim, Sirico told a story of when he was training to be a priest. He states that each Friday he would help set up and serve a free meal to those in need, usually 200 to 500 people. One Friday after the meal, he and a friend cleaned up then went to a seafood pub just down the street. While eating the two men realized that the soup kitchen they had just finished working at was competition to the seafood pub and other surrounding restaurants. They realized that their charity was making it harder for other entrepreneurs to make a living and provide for their families.
Sirico basically states that when people are waited on “hand and foot” they become more dependant on others, therefore, making it even harder for them to get out of poverty. He also implies that giving “handouts” to people encourages laziness. He says, “When charity creates a disincentive for an able-bodied person to work, it leads this person down the wrong path. It encourages indolence. Real work provides the individual with the vehicle for a productive and virtuous life. It gives a person self esteem and a role to play in society.”
The support he uses does not help his case, though. For example, the comparison Sirico makes of the soup kitchen to a seafood pub is irrelevant. He states, "Just a block away we provide a product and a service that make this man's effort to provide for his own family more difficult.” A soup kitchen and a seafood pub are not comparable. The pub has the intention to make money, whereas a soup kitchen is not interested in money. Soup kitchens are there for the purpose of people who cannot afford to eat at other places. The speaker never states the prices or quality of food at the pub. This information would help the reader recognize the similarities and differences between the two. Sirico fails to mention the other restaurants that are also the pub owner's competition. Surrounding restaurants may be taking business from the pub, not the soup kitchen. In addition, Sirico uses insufficient personal experience to suggest that people are taking advantage of charity. After observing people coming to the soup kitchen, Sirico noticed a couple that "told me they needed to eat quickly because they were planning to go shopping after dinner.
O’Neill’s second premise is mistaken because we have a moral obligation to famine relief if we are in comparable a better position than those we are donating to. There is nothing wrong with working a full-time job just to donate to famine relief.
... a dinner meal can become a luxury. Soup kitchens sometimes become overcrowded and unable to serve everyone in need. As a result, malnutrition is not uncommon among these underprivileged families.
Charity is an excellent way for peoples immediate needs to be met. There is a disadvantage to this there is only so much money and resources to be given to the cause. For example, when resources were being sent to help the disaster in Haiti, there was attention drawn to the problem sent money and resources were sent to help but it only fixed a small problem not the overall problem of underprivileged country. Social change can help fix major problems in the world. To make an immense change takes a lot of effort and resources but can be done. Sometimes the people who are trying to change the social issue don’t completely understand the people they are trying to help. For instance, PETA was going to low-income communities and were offering to pay for the water and heating bills in exchange for making them to covert to vegan, but being a vegan is an expensive lifestyle. Trying to help low-income individuals by forcing them to conform to PETA’s belief system isn’t social change in the eyes of the individuals but PETA believes they are helping
When people are in need you want to help them but you don’t know how. If you see a homeless person asking for money and food, buy the something to eat and when you give the the food give them some money while you're at it.
For this book report on The Samaritans Dilemma by Deborah Stone will consist of two chapters I am going to talk about chapters 2,4. I will talk about what Stone was trying to say in the chapters and either if I will agree or disagree with what she has to say or if I can actually be in the middle of the argument and be for it as well as against it. I will as well be providing information from the book The American Welfare State by Brian Glenn to show why I favor a side in the dilemma Stone is talking about. Seven Bad Arguments Against Help In chapter two Stone tries to cover objections that people have against the welfare state. In the first argument she goes on and talks about that by helping people it makes them more dependent on other people
In the article “Famine, Affluence, and Morality,” Peter Singer argues that our conceptions on moral belief need to change. Specifically, He argues that giving to famine relief is not optional but a moral duty and failing to contribute money is immoral. As Singer puts it, “The way people in affluent countries react ... cannot be justified; indeed the whole way we look at moral issues-our moral conceptual scheme-needs to be altered and with it, the way of life that has come to be taken for granted in our society”(135). In other words Singer believes that unless you can find something wrong with the following argument you will have to drastically change your lifestyle and how you spend your money. Although some people might believe that his conclusion is too radical, Singer insists that it is the logical result of his argument. In sum, his view is that all affluent people should give much more to famine relief.
This paper explores Peter Singer’s argument, in Famine, Affluence, and Morality, that we have morally required obligations to those in need. The explanation of his argument and conclusion, if accepted, would dictate changes to our lifestyle as well as our conceptions of duty and charity, and would be particularly demanding of the affluent. In response to the central case presented by Singer, John Kekes offers his version, which he labels the and points out some objections. Revisions of the principle provide some response to the objections, but raise additional problems. Yet, in the end, the revisions provide support for Singer’s basic argument that, in some way, we ought to help those in need.
In the essay “Spare Change”, the author, Teresa Zsuaffa, illustrates how the wealthy don’t treat people facing poverty with kindness and generosity, but in turn pass demeaning glares and degrading gestures, when not busy avoiding eye contact. She does so by writing an emotional experience, using imagery and personification whenever possible to get to the reader’s heart. Quite similarly, Nick Saul writes, in the essay “The Hunger Game”, about how the wealthy and people of social and political power such as “[the community’s] elected representatives” (Saul, 2013, p. 357) leave the problem of hunger on the shoulders of the foodbanks because they believe “feeding the hungry is already checked off [the government’s] collective to-do list” (Saul,
Doward, Jamie. “Charity for homeless tells people not to give money to beggars at Christmas”. The
While Soup Kitchens are a way to feed the poor or homeless, it not a program that effectively helps the homeless onto their feet, it simply keeps them fed. (www.merriam-webster.com) These do help the unsheltered homeless population though. While there are shelters, not everyone has access to them or some even chose not to go. In the city of Los Angeles, there are about 27,000 homeless people who are unsheltered, that’s 1 in 378. There are various factors that cause homelessness; these include a decline in public assistance, domestic violence, drug and alcohol abuse, job loss, divorce, low wages, poverty, severe depression, physical disabilities or mental illnesses. From the year 2011 to 2012, the number of homeless people skyrocketed. In New York City alone, there are more homeless people in the year 2014 than there were in the recession of the 1980s. (www.studentsagainsthunger.org)
In this paper, I will argue against two articles which were written against Singer’s view, and against helping the poor countries in general. I will argue against John Arthur’s article Famine Relief and the Ideal Moral Code (1974 ) ,and Garrett Hardin’s article Lifeboat Ethics: the Case Against Helping the Poor ( 1976); I will show that both articles are exaggerating the negative consequences of aiding the poor, as well as building them on false assumptions. Both Arthur and Hardin are promoting the self-interest without considering the rights of others, and without considering that giving for famine relief means giving life to many children.
Homelessness is a major issue in our world today. There is an abundant amount of people who live on the street and barely have anything they can call their own. These people probably lived great lives at some point, they probably never thought of the concept of becoming homeless until it happened. Luckily there is help being brought to them from different kinds of sources in order to help get them back on the road to a happy and fulfilled life. Certain people in society have a desire to get homeless people off the streets, to get them food, clothing, and most importantly love. These people are volunteers who enjoy spending their free time helping the ones in need because they love to give back to their community . There is major volunteer groups out there like StandUp For Kids, this organization helps to improve lives of the homeless and street kids. Volunteers have a desire to get people off the streets because they know that no should feel as if they are worth nothing in this world. Besides the goodness of helping others, aiding to help the homeless people get back up in life, it can help make the economy better. Usually there is money
This is because it has no bearing on what you ought to do, and the moral point of view requires us to look beyond the interests of our own society. This socio-political scepticism can be worse as some believe that charity is merely a band aid fix to the deeper underlying problem that is continuously causing the poverty, and it only becomes the basis for local communities to be dependent on them. Conclusion According to Singer, we need to drastically revise our ways of thinking. It is a powerful call, and challenges people’s attitudes towards extreme poverty.
Benjamin Franklin once wrote “God helps those who help themselves.” However, in some cases, those who want help can’t actually help themselves. This is the sad reality of the homeless. Whenever a homeless person begs for money from the ground they slept on, I look at them for mere seconds and try to figure out their story. For some it’s easy to tell how they became homeless by the way they look. For example, they could have a physical handicap that limited their mobility so they couldn’t work. Maybe they appear as if they’ve abused drugs for years. However, for the remaining homeless that I’ve encountered, their story isn’t so obvious. They could have a mental illness, or simply had bad spending habits. Whether on the way to work or school, you will probably see a homeless person. They often stink up the area they are in and aren’t a pleasant sight. Solving the homeless problem would be in everyone’s best interest because it would make New York City more safe and enjoyable.
On a normal of our everyday life, we find ourselves going to work or heading somewhere to meet up with a friend. While on the way there we pass someone that we don’t know sitting down on the ground alongside with him is a cart from a store filled with old clothes that either found or got from someone, some trash, maybe something small to eat to help with his hungry stomach growling throughout the day. You wonder how he got themselves into a position like that? Yet sometimes we know how he got there, although, we don’t always know someone else’s story. You leave some money by his foot to help get himself somewhere for a short time. Homelessness has increased over the years, from 1990s up until now. I believe that we can help these get back into a better environment for their life with the help of local shelters, food banks, donations from churches and schools, and many more things we can do in Licking County.