For example, there were no longer any engineers left who knew how to build or maintain aqueducts. This meant that when these structures broke they couldn’t be fixed, and so over time there was less provision for clean water. The local population used the stone from the bath houses and other structures to build their own homes as there was less emphasis on public health. The new rulers of Britain did not think it was as important as the Romans had. By 1350 there were some quite serious public health problems in towns, where the lack of fresh water and drainage was a problem which caused the water to be contaminated by other sources and was not healthy to drink.
Unlike Robber Barons they saw charities as a way of offering good will to the community that they were located in. They behaved in a way that showed to the best of their ability they would work to build a community instead of taking the resources and preparing to leave. Not all wealthy people were able to succeed with what they believed. Andrew Carnegie believed that wealth is divided in three ways which is, the descendants receive it; it’s used to public purposes; or it’s taken for taxes. It is unfortunate that in many cases to get the wealthy to help, there may be a need to increase the tax burden of the wealthy upon death so as to not have that burden placed solely on the middle class wage
His first premise is, death and suffering due to starvation and malnutrition are very bad. Famine is prominent in many third world countries, and as people living on the same planet it is horrible to know that those less fortunate do not have the amount of food needed to survive. This is a fact, not an argument. Moving on to the second premise which states, if we can prevent something bad from happening without sacrificing something of equal moral importance then we ought to do it. I previously stated death and suffering from malnutrition are bad, therefore if we can prevent famine without harming ourselves we ought to do it.
We live in a world where we expect people to assist us in our time of need although we refuse to help those who truly need our assistance. Instead of making excuses, pointing fingers and placing blame on those less fortunate for their short comings ,we should learnt to embrace others and uplift them . At the end of it all giving to others in need is the only moral and ethical thing we can choose
Unemployed parents could not pay for food or water, nor could they pay for clothing and shelter, and as a result, innocent children suffered. Incapable of providing for their families, many fathers became frustrated, and simply abandoned them, leaving them to fend for themselves. Other times, young children were left homeless, having no one to care for them. During the height of the Great Depression, at least 200000 young people and 25000 families roamed the country, in search of food. These alarming statistics show just how greatly the Depression did actually impact
Mister singer uses it here to suggests that no-one should sacrifice more than we can spare but donate what we can that will do the most good for the greatest number of people. What this means is that one should not cause harm to themselves while helping others. It is my opinion that Mister Singer’s ideas are fully justifiable. First it is true that we must endeavor to provide aide and end suffering: Jeffery Obler wrote that “To ignore the needy is morally wrong, and failure to help is not acceptable” (Obler, 1986).it is also logical to assume that doing the right thing has an effect not only on the one helped but also on the helper: it makes one feel good about oneself and enriches your soul, giving you something about yourself to feel pride in your
Although advertisements seem as a positive addition to countries in need of a stable economy, it is a enormous impact on people’s lives. (Doc. E) Without it, people wouldn’t know the latest fashion style, the best car, or the new developed drink and it would keep people in a boring routine of buying the same products and not exploring. Even though advertisements try to influence people’s decisions, it is up to the people as consumers to make moral
I do believe that people suffering from lack of food, shelter and medical care is bad. I also think that if we can prevent something from happening we should do so without sacrificing moral importance. Just like in reference to the example Peter gave of the drowning child, I would not have thought about the shoes on my feet first. My first instincts would have been to save the child. However, I cannot swim but I would have found a branch or something to give the child to hold onto and grab so I could help pull the drowning child to safety.
And 80% would die within a week. Back then thay had lack of medical knowledge and they tried anything to cure the disease but nothing would work. The towns and cities faced food shortage. The outbreak had a huge impact on the field because the men who work in them was to sick to tend to the field and the crops would die. Animals that was being raised to eat went free because people was not able to tend to them.
But because of the greediness of some just as in other models what started out as good ended up not being able to provide the quality care at an affordable price like was promised. This country does need health care reform but managed care is not the answer. Anytime money is the goal someone has to lose out. There has to be a way to get quality care to folks who need it at affordable prices so that people do not have to go broke just to stay