Singer Solution to World Poverty Interprative Summary

502 Words3 Pages
“Singer Solution to World Poverty” Interpretive Summary In the excerpt from “The Singer solution to World Poverty,” by Peter Singer, a professor of bioethics at Princeton University, he reveals to the audience of The New York Times Sunday Magazine,, that further aid (in the form of donations and money,) needs to be sent to the places of the world who are in dire need of food and medical support. Singer implies this implication with the use of statistics and moral values to draw the reasoning for his argument (his main idea of the text,) which is a simple formula that states, whatever money we are not spending on luxuries, not necessities, should be given away. The compelling phrases that Singer uses such as, “…it is much easier to ignore an appeal for money to help children that you will never meet,” and “If you still think it was wrong for Bob not to flip the switch that would’ve diverted the train to save a child’s life, then it is hard to see how you could deny that it is also very wrong to not send money to the organizations listed above,” helps Singer insinuate that we are immoral if we do not aid these helpless children. Singer indicates that an average American family with the income of 50,000 spends 30,000 on necessities, which leaves 20,000 left over, which as he states “donations to help the world poor should be as close to 20,000$ as possible.” Here, Singer argues that we the people are more concerned with luxuries and getting the newest, bigger and better version, than we are with helping an aidless child get through the most important years of their lives. Singer assumes that we are more concerned with possessions than we are with supporting a child. He claims, “…the average American family spends almost one-third of their income on things that are no more necessary to them.” Singer then goes on to declare that we spend our
Open Document