Singers Solution to World Poverty

The writer behind “Singers Solution to World Poverty” advocates that U.S. citizens give away the majority of their dispensable income in order to end global suffering. Peter Singer makes numerous assumptions within his proposal about world poverty, and they are founded on the principle that Americans spend too much money on items and services that they do not need.

Singer uses some extreme methods in order to achieve his goal of getting readers to truly believe in his ideas and change their values and lifestyles. He uses an informal and conversational tone in this article and he demonstrates his views in an emotional manner by giving several illustrations. The author’s main point is that it is morally wrong for affluent people to spend money on unnecessary things such as restaurants and vacations when children are suffering in other countries. The use of this points out that the author believes in moralistic and compassionate values.

In addition, the author is sometimes being too forceful by telling the reader what to do. Since he uses such an emotional and forceful tone in the article, it is doubtful if Singer is successful at selling the audience on his point concerning this issue. He may have convinced many people to donate a particular amount of money for charity to poor countries, but his article is not effective enough to convince me. All human beings have the right to have luxury items even though many would argue that they are doing so at the expense of their morality.

In a hypothetical situation, Singer describes a man named Bob and his love for his uninsured Bugatti. Bob has just used up the greater part of his nest egg on an extremely valuable classic automobile. He loves his car not only because he enjoys drivi...

... middle of paper ...

...

Another weakness of Singer’s article is the aggressive language he uses throughout his piece of writing to influence the reader. For example, his use of forceful dialogue encourages people to give money in this following statement, Telling the reader what to do is not an effective way to convince an audience to make a contribution.

Singer’s argument may have swayed many people to donate their dispensable income to children in need despite the fact that it has many fundamental flaws. He argues that we should give away the majority of our earnings to charity. Since Singer wants the reader to donate such a large amount of money, the readers are given no choice but to contribute nothing whatsoever. His solution is not realistic and does not take into account the long-term financial impact this type of donation contribution system would have on a country’s economy.